Re: [HACKERS] Lazy hash table for XidInMVCCSnapshot (helps Zipfian a bit) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Lazy hash table for XidInMVCCSnapshot (helps Zipfian a bit)
Date
Msg-id 11893.1520262041@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Lazy hash table for XidInMVCCSnapshot (helps Zipfian a bit)  (Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Lazy hash table for XidInMVCCSnapshot (helps Zipfian abit)
List pgsql-hackers
Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> Snapshots are static (we don't really add new XIDs into existing ones,
> right?), so why don't we simply sort the XIDs and then use bsearch to
> lookup values? That should fix the linear search, without need for any
> local hash table.

+1 for looking into that, since it would avoid adding any complication
to snapshot copying.  In principle, with enough XIDs in the snap, an
O(1) hash probe would be quicker than an O(log N) bsearch ... but I'm
dubious that we are often in the range where that would matter.
We do need to worry about the cost of snapshot copying, too.

            regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Marko Tiikkaja
Date:
Subject: get_actual_variable_range vs idx_scan/idx_tup_fetch, again
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: PATCH: psql tab completion for SELECT