From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: Andreas Karlsson <andreas@proxel.se>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org
Subject: Re: Cutting initdb's runtime (Perl question embedded)
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2017 12:56:14 -0400
Message-ID: <27409.1492102574@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170413164132.3nhobp4z4wnnvhca@alap3.anarazel.de>
References: <30896.1492006367@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<a15e94ac-c346-5816-69ae-ec6811e32af1@proxel.se>
<972d541d-7285-53ff-ea71-dcbfd886570a@proxel.se>
<6312.1492100010@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<20170413164132.3nhobp4z4wnnvhca@alap3.anarazel.de>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-hackers>
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> Cool. I wonder if we also should remove AtEOXact_CatCache()'s
> cross-checks - the resowner replacement has been in place for a while,
> and seems robust enough. They're now the biggest user of time.
Hm, biggest user of time in what workload? I've not noticed that
function particularly.
I agree that it doesn't seem like we need to spend a lot of time
cross-checking there, though. Maybe keep the code but #ifdef it
under some nondefault debugging symbol.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, andres@anarazel.de, andreas@proxel.se
Subject: Re: Cutting initdb's runtime (Perl question embedded)
In-Reply-To: <27409.1492102574@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox