Re: Moving _bt_readpage and _bt_checkkeys into a new .c file
| От | Peter Geoghegan |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Moving _bt_readpage and _bt_checkkeys into a new .c file |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAH2-Wz=5-iS2oXTG-Zxu1Jwz0T8SpEYaJpa8M2iKoFRcvGPGAw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Moving _bt_readpage and _bt_checkkeys into a new .c file (Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Moving _bt_readpage and _bt_checkkeys into a new .c file
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Dec 6, 2025 at 9:44 PM Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie> wrote: > Since this ignore_killed_tuples change is also very simple, and also > seems like an easy win, I think that it can be committed as part of > the second patch. Without it needing to wait for too much more > performance validation. My plan is to commit the entire patch series (with a modified second patch that includes the ignore_killed_tuples change) in the next couple of days. As far as I can determine through performance validation that tested a variety of different scan types (simple point lookups, range scans, and a variety of different SAOP scan patterns), the patch series is an unambiguous win. It appears to be slightly faster even in unsympathetic cases, such as standard pgbench SELECT. -- Peter Geoghegan
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: