Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com> writes:
> On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 3:02 AM, Mithun Cy <mithun.cy@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>> I have created a patch to cache the meta page of Hash index in
>> backend-private memory. This is to save reading the meta page buffer every
>> time when we want to find the bucket page. In “_hash_first” call, we try to
>> read meta page buffer twice just to make sure bucket is not split after we
>> found bucket page. With this patch meta page buffer read is not done, if the
>> bucket is not split after caching the meta page.
Is this really safe? The metapage caching in btree is all right because
the algorithm is guaranteed to work even if it starts with a stale idea of
where the root page is. I do not think the hash code is equally robust
about stale data in its metapage.
>> Idea is to cache the Meta page data in rd_amcache and store maxbucket number
>> in hasho_prevblkno of bucket primary page (which will always be NULL other
>> wise, so reusing it here for this cause!!!).
> If it is otherwise unused, shouldn't we rename the field to reflect
> what it is now used for?
No, because on other pages that still means what it used to. Nonetheless,
I agree that's a particularly ugly wart, and probably a dangerous one.
> What happens on a system which has gone through pg_upgrade?
That being one reason why. It might be okay if we add another hasho_flag
bit saying that hasho_prevblkno really contains a maxbucket number, and
then add tests for that bit everyplace that hasho_prevblkno is referenced.
regards, tom lane
