On Fri, Apr 19, 2019 at 2:46 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > I am thinking that we should at least give it a try to move the map to > > > rel cache level to see how easy or difficult it is and also let's wait > > > for a day or two to see if Andres/Tom has to say anything about this > > > or on the response by me above to improve the current patch. > > > > Since we have a definite timeline, I'm okay with that, although I'm > > afraid I'm not quite knowledgeable enough to help much with the > > relcache piece. > > > > Okay, I can try to help. I think you can start by looking at > RelationData members (for ex. see how we cache index's metapage in > rd_amcache) and study a bit about routines in relcache.h. >
Attached is a hacky and work-in-progress patch to move fsm map to relcache. This will give you some idea. I think we need to see if there is a need to invalidate the relcache due to this patch. I think some other comments of Andres also need to be addressed, see if you can attempt to fix some of them. -- With Regards, Amit Kapila. EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
store_local_map_relcache_v1.patch
Description: Binary data
