Re: GIN data corruption bug(s) in 9.6devel

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tomas Vondra
Тема Re: GIN data corruption bug(s) in 9.6devel
Дата
Msg-id 5678582D.3000601@2ndquadrant.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: GIN data corruption bug(s) in 9.6devel  (Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: GIN data corruption bug(s) in 9.6devel  (Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers

On 12/21/2015 07:41 PM, Jeff Janes wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 19, 2015 at 3:19 PM, Tomas Vondra
> <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:

...

>> So both patches seem to do the trick, but (2) is faster. Not sure
>> if this is expected. (BTW all the results are without asserts
>> enabled).
>
> Do you know what the size of the pending list was at the end of each
> test?
>
> I think last one may be faster because it left a large mess behind
> that someone needs to clean up later.

No. How do I measure it?

>
> Also, do you have the final size of the indexes in each case?

No, I haven't realized the patches do affect that, so I haven't measured it.

regards

--
Tomas Vondra                  http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Chapman Flack
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: tracking owner of extension-managed objects
Следующее
От: Peter Geoghegan
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Re: Reusing abbreviated keys during second pass of ordered [set] aggregates