Hello, everyone.
> It seems to me storing the index itself is simpler and maybe faster by
> the cycles to perform addition.
Done in v7.
> Since each xid in the tree is always stored to the right, it should be
> possible to make that significantly better by starting each binary
> search from the next element, rather than the start of the array.
Also, looks like it is better to go with `tail = Max(start,
pArray->tailKnownAssignedXids)` (in v1-0001-TODO.patch)
Performance tests show Simon's approach solves the issue without
significant difference in performance comparing to my version.
I need some additional time to provide statistically significant best
coefficients (how often to go compression, minimum number of invalid
xids to start compression).
Thanks,
Michail.
