Re: [HACKERS] Unused variable scanned_tuples in LVRelStats

2017-08-03 Thread Masahiko Sawada
On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 3:01 AM, Robert Haas  wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 1:10 AM, Masahiko Sawada  wrote:
>> So we can remove scanned_tuples from LVRelStats struct and change the
>> variable name num_tuples to scanned_tuples. Attached updated patch.
>
> On second thought, I think we should just leave this alone.
> scanned_tuples is closely tied to tupcount_pages, so it's a little
> confusing to pull one out and not the other.  And we can't pull
> tupcount_pages out of LVRelStats because lazy_cleanup_index needs it.
> The current situation isn't doing any harm, so I'm not seeing much
> point in changing it.
>

Hmm, since I agree the current situation isn't doing any harm actually
I don't push hard for this but I'd like to still propose at least the
original patch that fixes an inconsistent in the code.

Regards,

--
Masahiko Sawada
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers


Re: [HACKERS] Unused variable scanned_tuples in LVRelStats

2017-08-03 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 1:10 AM, Masahiko Sawada  wrote:
> So we can remove scanned_tuples from LVRelStats struct and change the
> variable name num_tuples to scanned_tuples. Attached updated patch.

On second thought, I think we should just leave this alone.
scanned_tuples is closely tied to tupcount_pages, so it's a little
confusing to pull one out and not the other.  And we can't pull
tupcount_pages out of LVRelStats because lazy_cleanup_index needs it.
The current situation isn't doing any harm, so I'm not seeing much
point in changing it.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers


Re: [HACKERS] Unused variable scanned_tuples in LVRelStats

2017-08-02 Thread Masahiko Sawada
On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 11:40 PM, Robert Haas  wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 10:13 PM, Masahiko Sawada  
> wrote:
>> scanned_tuples variable in LVRelStats is introduced by commit b4b6923e
>> but it seems to me that it's actually not used. We store num_tuples
>> into vacrelstats->scanned_tuples after scanned all blocks, and the
>> comment mentioned that saving it in order to use later but we actually
>> use num_tuples instead of vacrelstats->scanned_tuples from there. I
>> think the since the name of scanned_tuples implies more clearer
>> purpose than num_tuples it's better to use it instead of num_tuples,
>> or we can remove scanned_tuples from LVRelStats.

Thank you for the comment!

>
> I think we should only store stuff in LVRelStats if it needs to be
> passed to some other function.

Agreed. From this point of view, num_tuples is only one variable of
LVRelStats that is not passed to other functions.

> Data that's only used in
> lazy_scan_heap() can just be kept in local variables.  We could rename
> the local variable, though, since I agree with you that scanned_tuples
> is clearer.
>

So we can remove scanned_tuples from LVRelStats struct and change the
variable name num_tuples to scanned_tuples. Attached updated patch.

Regards,

--
Masahiko Sawada
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center


fix_vacuumlazy_v2.patch
Description: Binary data

-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers


Re: [HACKERS] Unused variable scanned_tuples in LVRelStats

2017-08-02 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 10:13 PM, Masahiko Sawada  wrote:
> scanned_tuples variable in LVRelStats is introduced by commit b4b6923e
> but it seems to me that it's actually not used. We store num_tuples
> into vacrelstats->scanned_tuples after scanned all blocks, and the
> comment mentioned that saving it in order to use later but we actually
> use num_tuples instead of vacrelstats->scanned_tuples from there. I
> think the since the name of scanned_tuples implies more clearer
> purpose than num_tuples it's better to use it instead of num_tuples,
> or we can remove scanned_tuples from LVRelStats.

I think we should only store stuff in LVRelStats if it needs to be
passed to some other function.  Data that's only used in
lazy_scan_heap() can just be kept in local variables.  We could rename
the local variable, though, since I agree with you that scanned_tuples
is clearer.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers