Re: New gist vacuum.
| От | Andrey Borodin |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: New gist vacuum. |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 9F56D93E-0ABF-44B2-A8F3-4B606D6F3F32@yandex-team.ru обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: New gist vacuum. (Alexander Korotkov <a.korotkov@postgrespro.ru>) |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi, Alexander!
Many thanks for looking into patches!
A little bit later I will provide answer in other branch of discussion.
Ok, done. https://commitfest.postgresql.org/17/148315 янв. 2018 г., в 23:34, Alexander Korotkov <a.korotkov@postgrespro.ru> написал(а):I do not know, should I register separate commitfest entry? The code is very close to main GiST VACUUM patch, but solves a bit different problem.Yes, I think it deserves separate commitfest entry. Despite it's related to GiST VACUUM, it's a separate fix.
Great, thanks!I've made small improvements to this patch: variable naming, formatting, comments.
We do not need to count if we have exact count from heap and this index is not partial. ITSM that it is quite common case.BTW, do we really need to set shouldCount depending on whether we receive stats argument or not? What if we always set shouldCount as in the first branch of "if"?shouldCount = !heap_attisnull(rel->rd_indextuple, Anum_pg_index_indpred) ||
info->estimated_count;
Best regards, Andrey Borodin.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: