On Mon, Dec 22, 2025 at 8:03 PM wenhui qiu <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi > > > It looks like a reasonable idea as it also simplifies the > > pg_visibility_map_summary() function. I'm going to push it, barring > > any objections. > Obviously no objections, Using visibilitymap_count() simplifies the code and > improves performance, with no behavior change. > > Thanks > > > On Tue, Dec 23, 2025 at 6:17 AM Matthias van de Meent > <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> On Mon, 22 Dec 2025 at 23:04, Masahiko Sawada <[email protected]> wrote: >> > On Mon, Dec 22, 2025 at 1:28 PM Matthias van de Meent >> > <[email protected]> wrote: >> > > Here's one small patch that makes it use the visibilitymap_count() API >> > > for pg_visibility_map_summary(), replacing its own bespoke counting >> > > mechanism with the primary implementation that has vectorized >> > > optimizations, thus reducing the overhead of >> > > pg_visibility_map_summary. >> > > >> > >> > It looks like a reasonable idea as it also simplifies the >> > pg_visibility_map_summary() function. I'm going to push it, barring >> > any objections. >> >> Obviously no objections from me, and, thanks! >>
Pushed. Regards, -- Masahiko Sawada Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
