Re: 16-bit page checksums for 9.2 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Simon Riggs
Subject Re: 16-bit page checksums for 9.2
Date
Msg-id CA+U5nMKz7W_BpKw6-rUqqRObCQFYmR1ySZmRcnO-0tJkj=yfvg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: 16-bit page checksums for 9.2  ("Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>)
Responses Re: 16-bit page checksums for 9.2  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Kevin Grittner
<Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov> wrote:
> Simon Riggs  wrote:
>
>> My focus was on getting something working first, then tuning. If
>> we're agreed that we have everything apart from the tuning then we
>> can proceed with tests to see which works better.
>
> Sure.  I just think you are there already except for what I got into.
>
> FWIW, moving the modulus application out of the loop is a very
> trivial change and has no affect on the results; it's strictly a
> performance issue.

New version attached, with your suggested changes included. Hole check
code is there as well, but ifdef'd out since it isn't a valid check in
all cases.

--
 Simon Riggs                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_restore direct to database is broken for --insert dumps
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: CLOG contention