| From: | Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Jaime Casanova <jaime(dot)casanova(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Haribabu Kommi <kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Patch: Write Amplification Reduction Method (WARM) |
| Date: | 2017-04-06 01:37:58 |
| Message-ID: | CABOikdO9eMsvw8D2d_j5+nVVq5pNZyqxYS=zTuezf_K2Z=ojfA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 1:06 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 2:32 PM, Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
>
> > The other way is to pass old tuple values along with the new tuple
> values to
> > amwarminsert, build index tuples and then do a comparison. For duplicate
> > index tuples, skip WARM inserts.
>
> This is more what I was thinking. But maybe one of the other ideas
> you wrote here is better; not sure.
>
>
Ok. I think I suggested this as one of the ideas upthread, to support hash
indexes for example. This might be a good safety-net, but AFAIC what we
have today should work since we pretty much construct index tuples in a
consistent way before doing a comparison.
Thanks,
Pavan
--
Pavan Deolasee http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jim Nasby | 2017-04-06 01:40:07 | Re: Faster methods for getting SPI results (460% improvement) |
| Previous Message | Stephen Frost | 2017-04-06 01:34:22 | Re: Re: new set of psql patches for loading (saving) data from (to) text, binary files |