Re: [PoC] Improve dead tuple storage for lazy vacuum - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From John Naylor
Subject Re: [PoC] Improve dead tuple storage for lazy vacuum
Date
Msg-id CANWCAZZWT80LwkFFp49Y1dUgdW6f6bowSDXLY4=8WM00Q-oCGg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PoC] Improve dead tuple storage for lazy vacuum  (Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [PoC] Improve dead tuple storage for lazy vacuum  (Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Actually, I forgot -- I had one more question: Masahiko, is there a
reason for this extra local variable, which uses the base type, rather
than the typedef'd parameter?

+RT_SCOPE RT_RADIX_TREE *
+RT_ATTACH(dsa_area *dsa, RT_HANDLE handle)
+{
+ RT_RADIX_TREE *tree;
+ dsa_pointer control;
+
+ tree = (RT_RADIX_TREE *) palloc0(sizeof(RT_RADIX_TREE));
+
+ /* Find the control object in shared memory */
+ control = handle;



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: vignesh C
Date:
Subject: Re: speed up a logical replica setup
Next
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: Potential stack overflow in incremental base backup