Re: WIP: Avoid creation of the free space map for small tables

From: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: John Naylor <john(dot)naylor(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: WIP: Avoid creation of the free space map for small tables
Date: 2019-03-07 13:43:18
Message-ID: CAA4eK1L0kzxMXr7k=crHNOjKiP12pAZ32ghg40bzzeAZa2TYqw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sat, Feb 23, 2019 at 1:24 PM John Naylor <john(dot)naylor(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 9:27 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > I think this test is going to break on nonstandard block sizes. While
> > we don't promise that all tests work on such installs (particularly
> > planner ones), it seems fairly easy to cope with this one -- just use a
> > record size expressed as a fraction of current_setting('block_size').
> > So instead of "1024" you'd write current_setting('block_size') / 8.
> > And then display the relation size in terms of pages, not bytes, so
> > divide pg_relation_size by block size.
>
> I've done this for v6, tested on 16k block size.
>

Thanks, the patch looks good to me. I have additionally tested it 32K
and 1K sized blocks and the test passes. I will commit this early
next week.

--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2019-03-07 13:52:21 Re: Pluggable Storage - Andres's take
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2019-03-07 13:40:32 Re: proposal: plpgsql pragma statement