Re: README of hash index
От | Jeff Janes |
---|---|
Тема | Re: README of hash index |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAMkU=1zTNn8Yrj2rN1P-J1=aMFNW-NK4OVpqxnhgS2APnd9hVQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | README of hash index (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: README of hash index
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 4:20 AM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
Currently README of hash module contain algorithms written in below form.
The insertion algorithm is rather similar:
pin meta page and take buffer content lock in shared mode
loop:
compute bucket number for target hash key
release meta page buffer content lock
if (correct bucket page is already locked)
break
release any existing bucket page lock (if a concurrent split happened)
take heavyweight bucket lock in shared mode
retake meta page buffer content lock in shared mode
-- (so far same as reader)
release pin on metapage
..
..
I have mostly updated them in the patches I have proposed to improve
hash index. However, each time I try to update them, I find that it
is easy to follow the code than to read and understand the existing
algorithm written in above form from README.
Do others find it useful to maintain the algorithms in above form?
I think that having them all condensed into one place makes it easier to think through the locking models to decide if there might be races or deadlocks. If you only care about the algorithm for inserting in isolation, I agree reading the code might be better.
But the use of white space isn't always consistent, and I don't know what a double hyphen means. I think it could use improvement, rather than abolishing.
Cheers,
Jeff
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: