| From: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Improve WALRead() to suck data directly from WAL buffers when possible |
| Date: | 2024-02-12 23:56:19 |
| Message-ID: | ffd67cc0a7b6b4c06ad36967c4d7eb7825bf293a.camel@j-davis.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 2024-02-12 at 11:33 -0800, Jeff Davis wrote:
> For 0002 & 0003, I'd like more clarity on how they will actually be
> used by an extension.
In patch 0002, I'm concerned about calling
WaitXLogInsertionsToFinish(). It loops through all the locks, but
doesn't have any early return path or advance any state.
So if it's repeatedly called with the same or similar values it seems
like it would be doing a lot of extra work.
I'm not sure of the best fix. We could add something to LogwrtResult to
track a new LSN that represents the highest known point where all
inserters are finished (in other words, the latest return value of
WaitXLogInsertionsToFinish()). That seems invasive, though.
Regards,
Jeff Davis
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | jian he | 2024-02-13 00:00:00 | Re: POC, WIP: OR-clause support for indexes |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2024-02-12 23:41:34 | Re: glibc qsort() vulnerability |