On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 05:31:50PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > After looking through this thread, I side with Robert: we should reject > the remainder of this patch. It gives up page layout flexibility that > we might want back someday. Moreover, I didn't see any hard evidence > offered that there's any actual performance gain, let alone such a > compelling gain that we should give up that flexibility for it.
As far as I understand, we are talking about this one: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/caeze2wj9c0abw2arbc8jzouudguro5av6sj2h83du6tm+q1...@mail.gmail.com After a few months looking at it again, I cannot get much excited about switching these routines from a logic where we look at the page header to something where we'd rely on the opaque structure size. I am wondering if it would be worth adding an AssertMacro() like in this one, though: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/ykap64jvztmgc...@paquier.xyz This still uses PageGetSpecialPointer() to retrieve the pointer area from the page header, but it also checks that we have a match with the structure expected by the index AM. -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
