Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Write Amplification Reduction Method (WARM)
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Write Amplification Reduction Method (WARM) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+TgmobLOGghKaTNcH=gFTUsHX79k3aUzXb8dUr5ex1O+42_Fw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Write Amplification Reduction Method (WARM) (Pavan Deolasee <pavan.deolasee@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Write Amplification Reduction Method (WARM)
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 3:44 PM, Pavan Deolasee <pavan.deolasee@gmail.com> wrote: > I couldn't find a better way without a lot of complex infrastructure. Even > though we now have ability to mark index pointers and we know that a given > pointer either points to the pre-WARM chain or post-WARM chain, this does > not solve the case when an index does not receive a new entry. In that case, > both pre-WARM and post-WARM tuples are reachable via the same old index > pointer. The only way we could deal with this is to mark index pointers as > "common", "pre-warm" and "post-warm". But that would require us to update > the old pointer's state from "common" to "pre-warm" for the index whose keys > are being updated. May be it's doable, but might be more complex than the > current approach. /me scratches head. Aren't pre-warm and post-warm just (better) names for blue and red? -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: