On Fri, Jan 30, 2026, at 12:20 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,

Hello, thanks for taking a peek at this one.

> Sorry for being a downer - but: Is the gain here really worth the squeeze?

You are certainly not wrong, there are a lot of changes in this patch set.  To 
be honest, I'm not sure if it is "worth the squeeze" either.

What this patch does: it removes the need to rediscover the set of indexed 
attributes that changed during catalog tuple updates.

Impact of that change: as-yet-unmeasured performance gains due to not having to 
redo work while holding a lock on the heap page.

So, the "squeeze" is not critical.  This work grew out of CF-5556 where I move 
into the executor the equivalent logic as HeapDetermineColumnsInfo() and open 
the door to expanding the cases where we can have HOT updates.  The two use 
cases for heap_update() are from heapam_tuple_update() called from the executor 
and simple_heap_update() called when updating a catalog tuple.  The other patch 
set (5556) covers one side, this covers the other.

> This is a *lot* of changes just to avoid a bunch of comparisons when doing
> catalog changes.

I was working on 5556, trying to provide a more detailed performance analysis, 
considering how I might fold the common bits at the top of heap_update() into a 
common function used by both heapam_tuple_update() and simple_heap_update() and 
then fold HeapDetermineColumnsInfo() into simple_heap_update() entirely with a 
comment that says something like, "it would take a lot of churn to fix up all 
the places we're updating catalog tuples..." etc.

If I do that, then this patch set is optional and as you said likely not worth 
the squeeze.  That said, I do find our current patterns for catalog tuples a 
bit... well, they aren't what I'd choose to show people first as examples of 
programming excellence in Postgres.  But they work, and have done so for a long 
time and that's worth something.

Maybe down the road I can revisit this and revamp things a bit more completely 
and maybe do so in a more incremental/piecemeal way.

best, and thanks for taking the time to express your thoughts, :)

-greg

> Greetings,
>
> Andres Freund


Reply via email to