On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 3:54 PM, Amit Langote <langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote: > On 2017/06/26 10:54, Michael Paquier wrote: >> On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 11:17 AM, Amit Langote >> <langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote: >>> That was it, thanks for the pointer. >> >> GinInitMetabuffer() sets up pd_lower and pd_upper anyway using >> PageInit so the check of PageIsVerified is guaranteed to work in any >> case. Upgraded pages will still have their pd_lower set to the >> previous values, and new pages will have the optimization. So this >> patch is actually harmless for past pages, while newer ones are seen >> as more compressible. > > Right. > >>> Attached updated patch, which I confirmed, passes wal_consistency_check = >>> gin. >> >> I have spent some time looking at this patch, playing with pg_upgrade >> to check the state of the page upgraded. And this looks good to me. > > Thanks for the review. > >> One thing that I noticed is that this optimization could as well >> happen for spgist meta pages. What do others think? > > I agree. As Sawada-san mentioned, brin metapage code can use a similar patch. > > So attached are three patches for gin, brin, and sp-gist respectively. > Both brin and sp-gist cases didn't require any special consideration for > passing wal_consistency_checking, as the patch didn't cause brin and > sp-gist metapages to become invalid when recreated on standby (remember > that patch 0001 needed to be updated for that). >
Thank you for the patches! I checked additional patches for brin and spgist. They look good to me. Regards, -- Masahiko Sawada NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION NTT Open Source Software Center -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers