Re: Boundary value check in lazy_tid_reaped()
От | Thomas Munro |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Boundary value check in lazy_tid_reaped() |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+hUKG++PXpa1xqAQJCc0x5Z6L3qjdyTr8B1Rp3Q2cp=NYishA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Boundary value check in lazy_tid_reaped() (Masahiko Sawada <masahiko.sawada@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Boundary value check in lazy_tid_reaped()
Re: Boundary value check in lazy_tid_reaped() |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Aug 30, 2020 at 11:08 PM Masahiko Sawada <masahiko.sawada@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > So my proposal is to add boundary value check in lazy_tid_reaped() > before executing bsearch(3). This will help when index vacuum happens > multiple times or when garbage tuples are concentrated to a narrow > range. Makes sense if it's often out of range. > I thought that we can have a generic function wrapping bsearch(3) that > does boundary value checks and then does bsearch(3) so that we can use > it in other similar places as well. But the attached patch doesn't do > that as I'd like to hear opinions on the proposal first. I wonder if you would also see a speed-up with a bsearch() replacement that is inlineable, so it can inline the comparator (instead of calling it through a function pointer). I wonder if something more like (lblk << 32 | loff) - (rblk << 32 | roff) would go faster than the branchy comparator.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: