Re: [HACKERS] Page Scan Mode in Hash Index

On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 7:14 PM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 2:07 PM, Ashutosh Sharma <ashu.coek88@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Ashutosh Sharma <ashu.coek88@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> While doing the code coverage testing of v7 patch shared with - [1], I
>>> found that there are few lines of code in _hash_next() that are
>>> redundant and needs to be removed. I basically came to know this while
>>> testing the scenario where a hash index scan starts when a split is in
>>> progress. I have removed those lines and attached is the newer version
>>> of patch.
>>>
>>
>> Please find the new version of patches for page at a time scan in hash
>> index rebased on top of latest commit in master branch. Also, i have
>> ran pgindent script with pg_bsd_indent version 2.0 on all the modified
>> files. Thanks.
>>
>
> Few comments:

Thanks for reviewing the patch.

> 1.
> +_hash_kill_items(IndexScanDesc scan, bool havePin)
>
> I think you can do without the second parameter.  Can't we detect
> inside _hash_kill_items whether the page is pinned or not as we do for
> btree?

Okay, done that way. Please check attached v10 patch.

>
> 2.
> + /*
> + * We remember prev and next block number along with current block
> + * number so that if fetching the tup- les using cursor we know
> + * the page from where to startwith. This is for the case where we
> + * have re- ached the end of bucket chain without finding any
> + * matching tuples.
>
> The spelling of tuples and reached contain some unwanted symbol.  Have
> space between "startwith" or just use "begin"

Corrected.

>
> 3.
> + if (!BlockNumberIsValid((opaque)->hasho_nextblkno))
> + {
> + so->currPos.prevPage = (opaque)->hasho_prevblkno;
> + so->currPos.nextPage = InvalidBlockNumber;
> + }
>
> There is no need to use Parentheses around opaque.  I mean there is no
> problem with that, but it is redundant and makes code less readable.
> Also, there is similar usage at other places in the code, please
> change all another place as well.

Removed parenthesis around opaque.

 I think you can save the value of
> prevblkno in a local variable and use it in else part.

Okay, done that way.

>
> 4.
> + if (so->hashso_sk_hash == _hash_get_indextuple_hashkey(itup) &&
> + _hash_checkqual(scan, itup))
> + {
> + /* tuple is qualified, so remember it */
> + _hash_saveitem(so, itemIndex, offnum, itup);
> + itemIndex++;
> + }
> + else
> +
> + /*
> + * No more matching tuples exist in this page. so, exit while
> + * loop.
> + */
> + break;
>
> It is better to have braces for the else part. It makes code look
> better.  The type of code exists few line down as well, change that as
> well.

Added braces in the else part.

>
> 5.
> + /*
> + * We save the LSN of the page as we read it, so that we know whether it
> + * safe to apply LP_DEAD hints to the page later.
> + */
>
> "whether it safe"/"whether it is safe"

Corrected.

-- 
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma
EnterpriseDB:http://www.enterprisedb.com

-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers