Re: non-HOT update not looking at FSM for large tuple update

From: John Naylor <john(dot)naylor(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Floris Van Nee <florisvannee(at)optiver(dot)com>
Cc: Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: non-HOT update not looking at FSM for large tuple update
Date: 2021-03-09 17:38:57
Message-ID: CAFBsxsEdunCn+B7nBcJF89YASTi_5SGUsgKkXmnmTUuEU28LnA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

I wrote:

> That seems like the proper fix, and I see you've started a thread for
that. I don't think that change in behavior would be backpatchable, but
patch here might have a chance at that.

I remembered after the fact that truncating line pointers would only allow
for omitting the 2% slack logic (and has other benefits), but the rest of
this patch would be needed regardless.

--
John Naylor
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Steele 2021-03-09 17:43:46 Re: Online verification of checksums
Previous Message John Naylor 2021-03-09 17:25:14 Re: non-HOT update not looking at FSM for large tuple update