Re: Setting pd_lower in GIN metapage

From: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Setting pd_lower in GIN metapage
Date: 2017-09-25 04:43:46
Message-ID: CAB7nPqTE4-GCaLtDh=JBcgUKR6B5WkvRLC-NpOqkgybi4FhHPw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sun, Sep 24, 2017 at 2:25 PM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Added and updated the comments for both btree and hash index patches.

I don't have real complaints about this patch, this looks fine to me.

+ * Currently, the advantage of setting pd_lower is in limited cases like
+ * during wal_consistency_checking or while logging for unlogged relation
+ * as for all other purposes, we initialize the metapage. Note, it also
+ * helps in page masking by allowing to mask unused space.
I would have reworked this comment a bit, say like that:
Setting pd_lower is useful for two cases which make use of WAL
compressibility even if the meta page is initialized at replay:
- Logging of init forks for unlogged relations.
- wal_consistency_checking logs extra full-page writes, and this
allows masking of the unused space of the page.

Now I often get complains that I suck at this exercise ;)
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Haribabu Kommi 2017-09-25 04:50:38 Re: VACUUM and ANALYZE disagreeing on what reltuples means
Previous Message Haribabu Kommi 2017-09-25 04:25:36 Re: visual studio 2017 build support