On 9/27/21, 11:06 AM, "Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn@amazon.com> wrote:
> On 9/24/21, 9:29 AM, "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>> So what I am inclined to do is commit
>> v1-0001-Improve-performance-of-pgarch_readyXlog-with-many.patch.
>> However, v6-0001-Do-fewer-directory-scans-of-archive_status.patch has
>> perhaps evolved a bit more than the other one, so I thought I should
>> first ask whether any of those changes have influenced your thinking
>> about the batching approach and whether you want to make any updates
>> to that patch first. I don't really see that this is needed, but I
>> might be missing something.
>
> Besides sprucing up the comments a bit, I don't think there is
> anything that needs to be changed. The only other thing I considered
> was getting rid of the arch_files array. Instead, I would swap the
> comparator function the heap uses with a reverse one, rebuild the
> heap, and then have pgarch_readyXlog() return files via
> binaryheap_remove_first(). However, this seemed like a bit more
> complexity than necessary.
>
> Attached is a new version of the patch with some expanded comments.
I just wanted to gently bump this thread in case there is any
additional feedback. I should have some time to work on it this week.
Also, it's looking more and more like this patch will nicely assist
the batching/loadable backup module stuff [0].
Nathan
[0] https://postgr.es/m/E9035E94-EC76-436E-B6C9-1C03FBD8EF54%40amazon.com
