FW: Advice: Where could I be of help? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers
From | Curtis Faith |
---|---|
Subject | FW: Advice: Where could I be of help? |
Date | |
Msg-id | DMEEJMCDOJAKPPFACMPMEEAOCEAA.curtis@galtair.com Whole thread Raw |
Responses |
Re: FW: Advice: Where could I be of help?
|
List | pgsql-hackers |
Forgot to cc' the list. -----Original Message----- From: Curtis Faith [mailto:curtis@galtair.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 10:59 PM To: Tom Lane Subject: RE: [HACKERS] Advice: Where could I be of help? Tom, Here are the things that I think look interesting: 1) Eliminate unchanged column indices:Prevent index uniqueness checks when UPDATE does not modifying column Small little task that will make a noticeable improvement. I've done this before in a b* tree system, it had a huge impact. Should be pretty isolated. 2) Use indexes for min() and max() or convert to SELECT col FROM tab ORDER BY col DESC LIMIT 1 if appropriate index exists and WHERE clause acceptable - This will probably be a little more involved but I've done this exact optimization in a SQL system 6 or 7 years ago. 3) General cache and i/o optimization: Use bitmaps to fetch heap pages in sequential order Based on my reading of the emails in [performance] it appears to me that there might be huge potential in the caching system. I've worked on these caches and there are some very non-intuitive interactions between database type access and file systems that I believe offer good potential for improvement. I'm basing this assessment on the assumption that the sorts of improvements discussed in the [performance] emails have not been added in subsequent releases. Where does the current code stand? How are we currently doing cache flushing in general and for indices in particular? 4) General index improvements including:Order duplicate index entries by tid for faster heap lookupsAdd FILLFACTOR to btreeindex creation I've done the first one before and fill factor is pretty easy, as well. 5) Bitmaps:Implement a bitmap index:Use bitmaps to combine existing indexes I've done something similar, it looks pretty interesting. 6) Improve concurrency of hash indexes (Neil Conway)- Probably more exploration than implementation and fairly isolated problem. Based on past experience, from a bang-for-buck perspective, I'd probably do this in the numerical order. What do you think? I know what I like and can do but I don't really know enough about PostgreSQL's performance weaknesses yet. What are we getting killed on? - Curtis -----Original Message----- From: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org [mailto:pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org]On Behalf Of Tom Lane Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 6:55 PM To: Curtis Faith Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Advice: Where could I be of help? Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes: > I would read the developers corner stuff, the developers FAQ, pick a > TODO item, and try a patch. It's that simple. Yup. I'd also suggest starting with something relatively small and localized (the nearby suggestion to fix IN/EXISTS, for example, is probably not a good first project --- and anyway I was going to work on that myself this month ;-)). Neil Conway's thought of working on plpgsql seems a good one to me; and as he says, there's lots of other possibilities. What do you find interesting in the TODO list? regards, tom lane ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
pgsql-hackers by date: