чт, 28 июн. 2018 г., 8:37 Andrey V. Lepikhov <a.lepik...@postgrespro.ru>:
> > > On 28.06.2018 05:00, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 11:40 PM, Andrey V. Lepikhov > > <a.lepik...@postgrespro.ru> wrote: > >> I still believe that the patch for physical TID ordering in btree: > >> 1) has its own value, not only for target deletion, > >> 2) will require only a few local changes in my code, > >> and this patches can be developed independently. > > > > I want to be clear on something now: I just don't think that this > > patch has any chance of getting committed without something like my > > own patch to go with it. The worst case for your patch without that > > component is completely terrible. It's not really important for you to > > actually formally make it part of your patch, so I'm not going to > > insist on that or anything, but the reality is that my patch does not > > have independent value -- and neither does yours. > > > As I wrote before in the last email, I will integrate TID sorting to my > patches right now. Please, give me access to the last version of your > code, if it possible. > You can track the progress at https://github.com/danolivo/postgres git > repository Peter is absolutely right, imho: tie-breaking by TID within index ordering is inevitable for reliable performance of this patch. With regards, Sokolov Yura.
