Re: Slow standby snapshot

Hello.

Thanks to everyone for the review.

> It seems to me storing the index itself is simpler and maybe faster by
> the cycles to perform addition.

Yes, first version used 1-byte for offset with maximum value of 255.
Agreed, looks like there is no sense to store offsets now.

> A simple patch like this seems to hit the main concern, aiming to keep
> the array from spreading out and impacting snapshot performance for
> SELECTs, yet not doing it so often that the startup process has a
> higher burden of work.

Nice, I'll do performance testing for both versions and master branch
as baseline.

Thanks,
Michail.