Re: [PoC] Improve dead tuple storage for lazy vacuum
От | Masahiko Sawada |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [PoC] Improve dead tuple storage for lazy vacuum |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAD21AoCLR17FzoUQf=13tAVL0kFbsfnW5rhmetTtM1rBZr+jzQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [PoC] Improve dead tuple storage for lazy vacuum (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>) |
Ответы |
Re: [PoC] Improve dead tuple storage for lazy vacuum
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Feb 13, 2022 at 11:02 AM Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote: > > Hi, > > On 2022-02-11 13:47:01 +0100, Matthias van de Meent wrote: > > Today I noticed the inefficiencies of our dead tuple storage once > > again, and started theorizing about a better storage method; which is > > when I remembered that this thread exists, and that this thread > > already has amazing results. > > > > Are there any plans to get the results of this thread from PoC to committable? > > I'm not currently planning to work on it personally. It'd would be awesome if > somebody did... Actually, I'm working on simplifying and improving radix tree implementation for PG16 dev cycle. From the discussion so far I think it's better to have a data structure that can be used for general-purpose and is also good for storing TID, not very specific to store TID. So I think radix tree would be a potent candidate. I have done the insertion and search implementation. Regards, -- Masahiko Sawada EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com/
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: