Re: PATCH: optimized DROP of multiple tables within a transaction - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tomas Vondra
Subject Re: PATCH: optimized DROP of multiple tables within a transaction
Date
Msg-id 50E31249.3060403@fuzzy.cz
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: PATCH: optimized DROP of multiple tables within a transaction  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 1.1.2013 17:35, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> There was an earlier suggestion by Andres Freund to use memcmp()
> instead, but I don't see that in the latest posted version of the patch;
> was there a specific rationale for taking it out or it was just lost in
> the shuffle?

No, I've tried that approach with a comparator like this:
   static int   rnode_comparator(const void * p1, const void * p2)   {           return memcmp(p1, p2,
sizeof(RelFileNode));  }
 

but it turned out to be slower than the current comparator. I've posted
some benchmark results and possible explanation on 20/12 (message
50D26FE8.1040800@fuzzy.cz).

If you could verify my results, that'd be great.

Tomas



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: PATCH: optimized DROP of multiple tables within a transaction
Next
From: Boszormenyi Zoltan
Date:
Subject: Review of "pg_basebackup and pg_receivexlog to use non-blocking socket communication", was: Re: Re: [BUGS] BUG #7534: walreceiver takes long time to detect n/w breakdown