Re: Vectorize pg_visibility.pg_visibility_map_summary - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Matthias van de Meent
Subject Re: Vectorize pg_visibility.pg_visibility_map_summary
Date
Msg-id CAEze2Wj4x141X4s6j2jmd5eTV3jg2YKVXK49iR4C8-3p3rpyeQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Vectorize pg_visibility.pg_visibility_map_summary  (Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Vectorize pg_visibility.pg_visibility_map_summary
List pgsql-hackers
Hi,

On Mon, 22 Dec 2025 at 23:04, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 22, 2025 at 1:28 PM Matthias van de Meent
> <boekewurm+postgres@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Here's one small patch that makes it use the visibilitymap_count() API
> > for pg_visibility_map_summary(), replacing its own bespoke counting
> > mechanism with the primary implementation that has vectorized
> > optimizations, thus reducing the overhead of
> > pg_visibility_map_summary.
> >
>
> It looks like a reasonable idea as it also simplifies the
> pg_visibility_map_summary() function. I'm going to push it, barring
> any objections.

Obviously no objections from me, and, thanks!


Kind regards,

Matthias van de Meent
Databricks (https://www.databricks.com)



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Masahiko Sawada
Date:
Subject: Re: Vectorize pg_visibility.pg_visibility_map_summary
Next
From: Matthias van de Meent
Date:
Subject: Re: Why doesn't GiST VACUUM require a super-exclusive lock, like nbtree VACUUM?