Re: [PATCHES] Synchronized Scan WIP patch

2007-06-04 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
Jeff Davis wrote: On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 09:08 +0100, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: * moved the sync scan stuff to a new file access/heapam/syncscan.c. heapam.c is long enough already, and in theory the same mechanism could be used for large bitmap heap scans in the future. Good idea, I hadn't

Re: [PATCHES] Synchronized Scan WIP patch

2007-05-31 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
Here's a work-in-progress update of this patch. I haven't done any major changes, but a lot of little refactoring and commenting, including: * moved the sync scan stuff to a new file access/heapam/syncscan.c. heapam.c is long enough already, and in theory the same mechanism could be used

Re: [PATCHES] Synchronized Scan WIP patch

2007-05-31 Thread Jeff Davis
On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 09:08 +0100, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: Here's a work-in-progress update of this patch. I haven't done any major changes, but a lot of little refactoring and commenting, including: * moved the sync scan stuff to a new file access/heapam/syncscan.c. heapam.c is long

Re: [PATCHES] Synchronized Scan WIP patch

2007-03-22 Thread Bruce Momjian
Will use '16' rather than '100'. Your patch has been added to the PostgreSQL unapplied patches list at: http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches It will be applied as soon as one of the PostgreSQL committers reviews and approves it.

Re: [PATCHES] Synchronized Scan WIP patch

2007-03-22 Thread Jeff Davis
On Thu, 2007-03-22 at 16:43 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: Will use '16' rather than '100'. Your patch has been added to the PostgreSQL unapplied patches list at: http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches It will be applied as soon as one of the PostgreSQL committers reviews

Re: [PATCHES] Synchronized Scan WIP patch

2007-03-15 Thread Simon Riggs
On Wed, 2007-03-14 at 01:42 -0700, Jeff Davis wrote: SYNC_SCAN_REPORT_INTERVAL 100 Jeff, This will stop SeqScans from working with buffer recycling, unless we put the recycle limit to more than 100. That was why I requested you set this to 16, so we can use a recycle buffer of 32. -- Simon

Re: [PATCHES] Synchronized Scan WIP patch

2007-03-15 Thread Jeff Davis
On Thu, 2007-03-15 at 08:27 +, Simon Riggs wrote: On Wed, 2007-03-14 at 01:42 -0700, Jeff Davis wrote: SYNC_SCAN_REPORT_INTERVAL 100 Jeff, This will stop SeqScans from working with buffer recycling, unless we put the recycle limit to more than 100. That was why I requested you set

[PATCHES] Synchronized Scan WIP patch

2007-03-14 Thread Jeff Davis
This is my latest revision of the Sync Scan patch, and it implements the observability as discussed with Simon. Changes: * ss_report_loc() called once per hundred pages rather than once per page * DEBUG messages are a little cleaner and easier to parse, for the sake of analysis after the fact.