On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 8:39 PM, Anastasia Lubennikova <
a.lubennik...@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
> 06.09.2016 07:44, Pavan Deolasee:
>
>
> I don't know what to do with the CF entry itself. I could change the
> status to "waiting on author" but then the design draft may not get enough
> attention. So I
On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 7:12 PM, Pavan Deolasee
wrote:
> I was thinking about locking, bulk reading (like page-mode API) etc. While
> you've added an API for vacuuming, we would probably also need an API to
> collect dead tuples, pruning etc (not sure if that can be combined with
> vacuum). Of cou
On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 8:39 PM, Anastasia Lubennikova <
a.lubennik...@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
> 06.09.2016 07:44, Pavan Deolasee:
>
> 2. I don't understand the difference between PageGetItemHeapHeaderOnly()
> and PageGetItemHeap(). They seem to do exactly the same thing and can be
> used interchang
06.09.2016 07:44, Pavan Deolasee:
On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 3:13 PM, Anastasia Lubennikova
mailto:a.lubennik...@postgrespro.ru>>
wrote:
Thank you for the review, I'll fix these problems in final version.
Posting the first message I intended to raise the discussion. Patches
were
On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 3:13 PM, Anastasia Lubennikova <
a.lubennik...@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
>
>>
> Thank you for the review, I'll fix these problems in final version.
>
> Posting the first message I intended to raise the discussion. Patches
> were attached mainly to illustrate the problem and to
08.08.2016 12:43, Anastasia Lubennikova:
08.08.2016 03:51, Michael Paquier:
On Sat, Aug 6, 2016 at 2:56 AM, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
Anastasia Lubennikova wrote:
So there is a couple of patches. They do not cover all mentioned
problems,
but I'd like to get a feedback before continuing.
I agree
Anastasia Lubennikova wrote:
> By the way, I thought about looking at the mentioned patch and
> probably reviewing it, but didn't find any of your patches on the
> current commitfest. Could you point out the thread?
Sorry, I haven't posted anything yet.
> >Agreed. But changing its name while ke
08.08.2016 03:51, Michael Paquier:
On Sat, Aug 6, 2016 at 2:56 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Anastasia Lubennikova wrote:
So there is a couple of patches. They do not cover all mentioned problems,
but I'd like to get a feedback before continuing.
I agree that we could improve things in this gener
05.08.2016 20:56, Alvaro Herrera:
Anastasia Lubennikova wrote:
Working on page compression and some other issues related to
access methods, I found out that the code related to heap
looks too complicated. Much more complicated, than it should be.
Since I anyway got into this area, I want to sugg
On Sat, Aug 6, 2016 at 2:56 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Anastasia Lubennikova wrote:
>> So there is a couple of patches. They do not cover all mentioned problems,
>> but I'd like to get a feedback before continuing.
>
> I agree that we could improve things in this general area, but I do not
> endo
Anastasia Lubennikova wrote:
> Working on page compression and some other issues related to
> access methods, I found out that the code related to heap
> looks too complicated. Much more complicated, than it should be.
> Since I anyway got into this area, I want to suggest a set of improvements.
H
05.08.2016 16:30, Kevin Grittner:
On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 2:54 AM, Anastasia Lubennikova
wrote:
They can be logically separated into three categories:
"primary storage" - r, S, t, v. They store data and visibility information.
The only implementation is heapam.c
"secondary index" - i. They stor
On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 2:54 AM, Anastasia Lubennikova
wrote:
> They can be logically separated into three categories:
> "primary storage" - r, S, t, v. They store data and visibility information.
> The only implementation is heapam.c
> "secondary index" - i. They store some data and pointers to p
On 5 August 2016 at 08:54, Anastasia Lubennikova
wrote:
> Working on page compression and some other issues related to
> access methods, I found out that the code related to heap
> looks too complicated. Much more complicated, than it should be.
> Since I anyway got into this area, I want to sugge
Working on page compression and some other issues related to
access methods, I found out that the code related to heap
looks too complicated. Much more complicated, than it should be.
Since I anyway got into this area, I want to suggest a set of improvements.
There is a number of problems I see i
15 matches
Mail list logo
