Re: [PATCH] Don't block HOT update by BRIN index
От | Tomas Vondra |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [PATCH] Don't block HOT update by BRIN index |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4a8c86eb-d570-ec78-b9af-66f218fae820@enterprisedb.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [PATCH] Don't block HOT update by BRIN index (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: [PATCH] Don't block HOT update by BRIN index
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 7/12/21 10:37 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > On 2021-Jul-12, Tomas Vondra wrote: > >> 2) Do we actually need to calculate and store hotblockingattrs >> separately in RelationGetIndexAttrBitmap? It seems to me it's either >> NULL (with amhotblocking=false) or equal to indexattrs. So why not to >> just get rid of hotblockingattr and rd_hotblockingattr, and do something >> like >> >> case INDEX_ATTR_BITMAP_HOT_BLOCKING: >> return (amhotblocking) ? bms_copy(rel->rd_hotblockingattr) : NULL; >> >> I haven't tried, so maybe I'm missing something? > > ... What? I thought the whole point is that BRIN indexes do not cause > the columns to become part of this set, while all other index types do. > If you make them both the same, then there's no point. > Well, one of us is confused and it might be me ;-) The point is that BRIN is the only index type with amhotblocking=false, so it would return NULL (and thus it does not block HOT). All other indexes AMs have amblocking=true and so should return rd_indexattr (I forgot to change that in the code chunk). regards -- Tomas Vondra EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: