Re: Questions/Observations related to Gist vacuum

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Andrey Borodin
Тема Re: Questions/Observations related to Gist vacuum
Дата
Msg-id CAA60D55-1C62-4093-B03E-B4A12E6C55E5@yandex-team.ru
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Questions/Observations related to Gist vacuum  (Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: Questions/Observations related to Gist vacuum  (Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Hi!

> 18 окт. 2019 г., в 13:21, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com> написал(а):
>
> On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 10:55 AM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> I think we can do it in general as adding some check for parallel
>> vacuum there will look bit hackish.
> I agree with that point.
> It is not clear if we get enough
>> benefit by keeping it for cleanup phase of the index as discussed in
>> emails above.  Heikki, others, let us know if you don't agree here.
>
> I have prepared a first version of the patch.  Currently, I am
> performing an empty page deletion for all the cases.

I've took a look into the patch, and cannot understand one simple thing...
We should not call gistvacuum_delete_empty_pages() for same gist_stats twice.
Another way once the function is called we should somehow update or zero empty_leaf_set.
Does this invariant hold in your patch?

Best regards, Andrey Borodin.


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Pavel Stehule
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: dropdb --force
Следующее
От: Andrey Borodin
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: pglz performance