Greetings,
* Tom Lane (tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> writes:
> > * Tom Lane (tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> >> Here's a proposed patch along that line.
>
> > I've back-patched this to 11 (which was just a bit of fuzz) and tested
> > it out with a couple of different queries that were causing issues
> > previously on the archive server, and they finish in a much more
> > reasonable time and react faster to cancel requests/signals.
>
> Yeah, I'd tried this locally using the data from the one test case you
> showed me, and it seemed to fix that.
Good stuff.
> > So, looks good to me, and would certainly be nice to get this into the
> > next set of releases, so the archive server doesn't get stuck anymore.
>
> I'll push this tomorrow if nobody has objected to it.
Sounds good.
> BTW, I had noticed last night that hlFirstIndex is being unreasonably
> stupid. Many of the "words" have null item pointers and hence can't
> possibly match any query item (I think because we have "words" for
> inter-word spaces/punctuation as well as the actual words). Checking
> that, as in the attached v2 patch, makes things a bit faster yet.
Nice, looks good to me.
Thanks!
Stephen