From: | Юрий Соколов <funny(dot)falcon(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Andrey V(dot) Lepikhov" <a(dot)lepikhov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
Cc: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, PostgreSQL-Dev <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: [WIP] [B-Tree] Retail IndexTuple deletion |
Date: | 2018-06-29 09:07:47 |
Message-ID: | CAL-rCA0BkRJgEfkQdDkii6kt0L-_8xcYqraaSmrrn_jzTFx-Pg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
чт, 28 июн. 2018 г., 8:37 Andrey V. Lepikhov <a(dot)lepikhov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>:
>
>
> On 28.06.2018 05:00, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 11:40 PM, Andrey V. Lepikhov
> > <a(dot)lepikhov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> wrote:
> >> I still believe that the patch for physical TID ordering in btree:
> >> 1) has its own value, not only for target deletion,
> >> 2) will require only a few local changes in my code,
> >> and this patches can be developed independently.
> >
> > I want to be clear on something now: I just don't think that this
> > patch has any chance of getting committed without something like my
> > own patch to go with it. The worst case for your patch without that
> > component is completely terrible. It's not really important for you to
> > actually formally make it part of your patch, so I'm not going to
> > insist on that or anything, but the reality is that my patch does not
> > have independent value -- and neither does yours.
> >
> As I wrote before in the last email, I will integrate TID sorting to my
> patches right now. Please, give me access to the last version of your
> code, if it possible.
> You can track the progress at https://github.com/danolivo/postgres git
> repository
Peter is absolutely right, imho: tie-breaking by TID within index
ordering is inevitable for reliable performance of this patch.
With regards,
Sokolov Yura.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | David Rowley | 2018-06-29 09:13:28 | Re: pgsql: Clarify use of temporary tables within partition trees |
Previous Message | Regina Obe | 2018-06-29 09:06:24 | Regression on PostgreSQL 10 ORDER/GROUP BY expression not found in targetlist |