RE: In-placre persistance change of a relation

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От tsunakawa.takay@fujitsu.com
Тема RE: In-placre persistance change of a relation
Дата
Msg-id TYAPR01MB2990D25E5CE77A095ADC90A3FEE60@TYAPR01MB2990.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: In-placre persistance change of a relation  (Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>)
Ответы RE: In-placre persistance change of a relation
Re: In-placre persistance change of a relation
Список pgsql-hackers
Hi Horiguchi-san,


Thank you for making a patch so quickly.  I've started looking at it.

What makes you think this is a PoC?  Documentation and test cases?  If there's something you think that doesn't work or
areconcerned about, can you share it? 

Do you know the reason why data copy was done before?  And, it may be odd for me to ask this, but I think I saw someone
referredto the past discussion that eliminating data copy is difficult due to some processing at commit.  I can't find
it.



(1)
@@ -168,6 +168,8 @@ extern PGDLLIMPORT int32 *LocalRefCount;
  */
 #define BufferGetPage(buffer) ((Page)BufferGetBlock(buffer))

+struct SmgrRelationData;

This declaration is already in the file:

/* forward declared, to avoid having to expose buf_internals.h here */
struct WritebackContext;

/* forward declared, to avoid including smgr.h here */
struct SMgrRelationData;


Regards
Takayuki Tsunakawa




В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Kyotaro Horiguchi
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Strange behavior with polygon and NaN
Следующее
От: Amit Kapila
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: POC: Cleaning up orphaned files using undo logs