On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 09:39:29AM +0900, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:
At Tue, 9 Apr 2019 17:03:33 +0200, Tomas Vondra <tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote
in <20190409150333.5iashyjxm5jmraml@development>
Unfortunately, now that we're past code freeze it's clear this is a
PG12
matter now :-(
I personally consider this to be very worthwhile & beneficial
improvement,
but I agree with Andres the patch did not quite get to committable
state
in the last CF. Conidering how sensitive part it touches, I suggest we
try
to get it committed early in the PG13 cycle. I'm willing to spend some
time on doing test/benchmarks and reviewing the code, if needed.
I'm very happy to be told that. Actually the code was a rush work
(mainly for reverting refactoring) and left some stupid
mistakes. I'm going through on the patch again and polish code.
While reviewing the patch I've always had issue with evaluating how it
behaves for various scenarios / workloads. The reviews generally did one
specific benchmark, but I find that unsatisfactory. I wonder whether if
we could develop a small set of more comprehensive workloads for this
patch (i.e. different numbers of objects, access patterns, ...).
regards
--
Tomas Vondra http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
