Re: [HACKERS] GUC for cleanup indexes threshold.

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Alexander Korotkov
Тема Re: [HACKERS] GUC for cleanup indexes threshold.
Дата
Msg-id CAPpHfdtziVYEajh6xhD8_O3cxsC_Z1TEYGxSbTEmFY-+N2c_dA@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] GUC for cleanup indexes threshold.  (Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: [HACKERS] GUC for cleanup indexes threshold.  (Teodor Sigaev <teodor@sigaev.ru>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Дерево обсуждения
On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 6:42 PM, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 8:01 PM, Alexander Korotkov
> So, I would like to clarify why could my patch block future improvements
> in this area?  For instance, if we would decide to make btree able to skip
> cleanup when some delete pages are pending for recycle, we can add
> it in future.
>

Anyway, for approaches of this feature I agree your version patch and
your patch looks good to me as the first step of this feature.

Agreed.  I think we got consensus that this patch is good first step,
which doesn't block further enhancements in future.

So, I'm attaching rebased version of patch and marking this RFC.

------
Alexander Korotkov
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company 
Вложения

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Heikki Linnakangas
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Optimize Arm64 crc32c implementation in Postgresql
Следующее
От: Magnus Hagander
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: pgsql: Validate page level checksums in base backups