Re: Heap WARM Tuples - Design Draft

From: Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Claudio Freire <klaussfreire(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Heap WARM Tuples - Design Draft
Date: 2016-08-10 02:45:26
Message-ID: CABOikdPJ4U_Oq4EU4UfPAQO+05J+KFoMib+4ZsaVnSiVm84R=g@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 12:06 AM, Claudio Freire <klaussfreire(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:

> On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 2:52 PM, Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
>
> > Some heuristics and limits on amount of work done to detect duplicate
> index
> > entries will help too.
>
> I think I prefer a more thorough approach.
>
> Increment/decrement may get very complicated with custom opclasses,
> for instance. A column-change bitmap won't know how to handle
> funcional indexes, etc.
>
> What I intend to try, is modify btree to allow efficient search of a
> key-ctid pair, by adding the ctid to the sort order.

Yes, that's a good medium term plan. And this is kind of independent from
the core idea. So I'll go ahead and write a patch that implements the core
idea and some basic optimizations. We can then try different approaches
such as tracking changed columns, tracking increment/decrement and teaching
btree to skip duplicate (key, CTID) entries.

Thanks,
Pavan

--
Pavan Deolasee http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Thomas Munro 2016-08-10 03:03:49 Re: dsm_unpin_segment
Previous Message Jim Nasby 2016-08-10 02:43:48 Re: dsm_unpin_segment