| From: | John Naylor <johncnaylorls(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Anton A(dot) Melnikov" <a(dot)melnikov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, Ants Aasma <ants(dot)aasma(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Junwang Zhao <zhjwpku(at)gmail(dot)com>, jian he <jian(dot)universality(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Gurjeet Singh <gurjeet(at)singh(dot)im>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Change GUC hashtable to use simplehash? |
| Date: | 2025-02-13 06:03:19 |
| Message-ID: | CANWCAZbxVto_L6ynXd4rPNyDbXoJxCTJJQV6zkfFriHEcP-Vxw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 9:58 AM Anton A. Melnikov
<a(dot)melnikov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> wrote:
> > Hi, my understanding was you previously tested with the revert. Did
> > you not actually test, or are you building differently for these
> > cases?
>
> My first test [1] was made at b7493e1
> while the second [2] at ecb8226a after reverting in the 235328ee.
Three weeks ago, you said "Agreed that reverting seems as a preferable
way, and here's why." I assumed that meant you tested it, so my
mistake. I'll take a look.
--
John Naylor
Amazon Web Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bertrand Drouvot | 2025-02-13 07:02:10 | Re: Track the amount of time waiting due to cost_delay |
| Previous Message | vignesh C | 2025-02-13 05:54:51 | Re: Restrict publishing of partitioned table with a foreign table as partition |