Re: testing HS/SR - 1 vs 2 performance - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: testing HS/SR - 1 vs 2 performance
Date
Msg-id 21841.1272394396@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: testing HS/SR - 1 vs 2 performance  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>)
Responses Re: testing HS/SR - 1 vs 2 performance  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Hmm ... there's another point here, which is that the array size creates
a hard maximum on the number of entries, whereas the hash table was a
bit more forgiving.  What is the proof that the array won't overflow?
The fact that the equivalent data structure on the master can't hold
more than this many entries doesn't seem to me to prove that, because
we will add intermediate not-observed XIDs to the array.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: Differential backup
Next
From: Heikki Linnakangas
Date:
Subject: Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Make CheckRequiredParameterValues() depend upon correct