Re: [PATCHES] HOT patch - version 11

2007-08-07 Thread Pavan Deolasee
On 8/2/07, Pavan Deolasee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > . It would also be better if we didn't emit a > > separate WAL record for defraging a page, if we also prune it at the > > same time. I'm not that worried about WAL usage in general, but that > > seems simple enough to fix. > > > > Ah I

Re: [PATCHES] HOT patch - version 11

2007-08-02 Thread Simon Riggs
On Wed, 2007-08-01 at 21:09 +0100, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > In heap_page_prune_defrag, it would be better to do the test for > BufferIsLockedForCleanup right after acquiring the lock. The longer the > delay between those steps, the bigger the chances that someone pins the > page and starts to w

Re: [PATCHES] HOT patch - version 11

2007-08-02 Thread Pavan Deolasee
On 8/2/07, Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Pavan Deolasee wrote: > > Please see the attached version 11 of HOT patch > > Thanks! > > One wrinkle in the patch is how the ResultRelInfo-struct is passed to > heap_update, and on to heap_check_idxupdate, to check any indexed > columns

Re: [PATCHES] HOT patch - version 11

2007-08-02 Thread Pavan Deolasee
On 8/2/07, Pavan Deolasee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On 8/2/07, Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Maybe a nicer > > solution would be to have another version of ConditionalLockBuffer with > > three different return values: didn't get lock, got exclusive lock, or > > got

Re: [PATCHES] HOT patch - version 11

2007-08-01 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
Pavan Deolasee wrote: > Please see the attached version 11 of HOT patch Thanks! One wrinkle in the patch is how the ResultRelInfo-struct is passed to heap_update, and on to heap_check_idxupdate, to check any indexed columns have changed. I think that's a modularity violation, heap_update really s

Re: [PATCHES] HOT patch - version 11

2007-08-01 Thread Pavan Deolasee
On 8/1/07, Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Wed, 2007-08-01 at 14:36 +0530, Pavan Deolasee wrote: > > > BufferIsLockedForCleanup() should be named BufferIsAvilableForCleanup(). > There is no cleanup mode, what we mean is that there is only one pin; > the comments say "If we are lucky e

Re: [PATCHES] HOT patch - version 11

2007-08-01 Thread Simon Riggs
On Wed, 2007-08-01 at 14:36 +0530, Pavan Deolasee wrote: > Please see the attached version 11 of HOT patch > > The concept of marking the pruned tuples with LP_DELETE and > reusing such tuples for subsequent UPDATEs has been removed > and replaced with a simpler mechanism of repairing the page