On 9/27/21, 11:06 AM, "Bossart, Nathan" <bossa...@amazon.com> wrote: > On 9/24/21, 9:29 AM, "Robert Haas" <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: >> So what I am inclined to do is commit >> v1-0001-Improve-performance-of-pgarch_readyXlog-with-many.patch. >> However, v6-0001-Do-fewer-directory-scans-of-archive_status.patch has >> perhaps evolved a bit more than the other one, so I thought I should >> first ask whether any of those changes have influenced your thinking >> about the batching approach and whether you want to make any updates >> to that patch first. I don't really see that this is needed, but I >> might be missing something. > > Besides sprucing up the comments a bit, I don't think there is > anything that needs to be changed. The only other thing I considered > was getting rid of the arch_files array. Instead, I would swap the > comparator function the heap uses with a reverse one, rebuild the > heap, and then have pgarch_readyXlog() return files via > binaryheap_remove_first(). However, this seemed like a bit more > complexity than necessary. > > Attached is a new version of the patch with some expanded comments.
I just wanted to gently bump this thread in case there is any additional feedback. I should have some time to work on it this week. Also, it's looking more and more like this patch will nicely assist the batching/loadable backup module stuff [0]. Nathan [0] https://postgr.es/m/E9035E94-EC76-436E-B6C9-1C03FBD8EF54%40amazon.com
