Re: pgsql: Add deduplication to nbtree.

From: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-committers <pgsql-committers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pgsql: Add deduplication to nbtree.
Date: 2020-03-01 18:57:10
Message-ID: CAH2-Wzn9_zQR9Q96JUyVBAdro52Ov6+bQ1zcE_FPxEVXGw-ebQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-committers

On Sun, Mar 1, 2020 at 10:24 AM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> I can see its point: asserting after the fact that you didn't clobber
> memory isn't a terribly safe coding method, especially in a production
> build where you won't even have the asserts. Not sure if there's a
> better way though.

I found it slightly more elegant to treat itup->t_tid as a degenerate
1 element posting list here, but I'm not particularly attached to that
approach. The loop is only truly necessary when dealing with a posting
list tuple.

Do you think that _bt_update_posting() should avoid this loop when
itup is just a plain tuple, that lacks a posting list? I can do it
that way if you prefer.

--
Peter Geoghegan

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-committers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2020-03-01 19:29:37 Re: pgsql: Add deduplication to nbtree.
Previous Message Tom Lane 2020-03-01 18:24:55 Re: pgsql: Add deduplication to nbtree.