Em qui., 10 de nov. de 2022 às 05:16, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> escreveu:
On Thu, Sep 01, 2022 at 08:42:15AM -0300, Ranier Vilela wrote: > Let's wait for the patch to be accepted and committed, so we can try to > change it.
FWIW, I think that this switch is a good idea for cases where we potentially update a bunch of tuples, especially based on what CatalogTupleInsert() tells in its top comment.
That's the idea.
Each code path updated here needs a performance check to see if that's noticeable enough, but I can get behind the one of CopyStatistics(), at least.
For CopyStatistics() have performance checks.
EnumValuesCreate() would matter less as this would require a large set of values in an enum, but perhaps ORMs would care and that should be measurable.
Have a list_length call, for a number of vals.
For 2 or more vals, it is already worth it, since CatalogOpenIndexes/CatalogCloseIndexes will be called for each val.
update_attstats() should lead to a measurable difference with a relation that has a bunch of attributes with few tuples.
Same here.
For 2 or more attributes, it is already worth it, since CatalogOpenIndexes/CatalogCloseIndexes will be called for each.
DefineTSConfiguration() is less of an issue, still fine to change.
Ok.
AddRoleMems() should be equally measurable with a large DDL. As a whole, this looks pretty sane to me and a good idea to move on with.
One filter, only.
For all these functions, the only case that would possibly have no effect would be in the case of changing a single tuple, in which case there would be only one call CatalogOpenIndexes/CatalogCloseIndexes for both paths.
I still need to check properly the code paths changed here, of course..
