public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Thomas Munro <[email protected]>
To: Tomas Vondra <[email protected]>
Cc: Peter Geoghegan <[email protected]>
Cc: Andres Freund <[email protected]>
Cc: Robert Haas <[email protected]>
Cc: Melanie Plageman <[email protected]>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <[email protected]>
Cc: Georgios <[email protected]>
Cc: Konstantin Knizhnik <[email protected]>
Cc: Dilip Kumar <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: index prefetching
Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2025 16:03:19 +1200
Message-ID: <CA+hUKG+P0RnG_c4vL6=d8ACwpmux5ZF91FO4UpX8PDu1WqEg9w@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <CAH2-Wzn7vqmt=qE_hDrOx4NETkUoCbdn74G1gswMXi1APUuYrA@mail.gmail.com>
<CAH2-Wz=G_HKYZ34-UkBMQjk7SCNtu9O5V4t=A0u82=WT-rtBuw@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+TgmoaEvBnx2npWycGt1ChTe8m800wMiioUCspaSb0qzc3=Kg@mail.gmail.com>
<CAH2-WznFwgU3AddTqnvJABX5xo-9upG6NiX+2s0eaFhFj6tRAg@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+Tgmobav+-oR9-jJUGbHj3j7bhwPpz7qVkfr_9zUSF-kens9A@mail.gmail.com>
<CAH2-WzkqnVGLEQ31W1vm8T_uzy-ma-6A8QL-C56=0QUqs12b=Q@mail.gmail.com>
<CAH2-WznmrgwFShyKuKjF2v7M_Eid6VzKd+SRPjh4-y68T6uCDw@mail.gmail.com>
<esftck6ayqkkdtzijd736oazhve577sp7hthnwouyg2stlwlqj@rmhohbhl7tuz>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<CAH2-WzmVvU2KmKyq8sUeYXrc_roA5LfOgDE1-vdtorpk_M3DfA@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<CAH2-Wzm-u6b4gDbLNP=1pkfqJbEyPyey9M-8wG0C+QOTit963Q@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
On Sat, Jul 19, 2025 at 6:31 AM Tomas Vondra <[email protected]> wrote:
> Perhaps the ReadStream should do something like this? Of course, the
> simple patch resets the stream very often, likely mcuh more often than
> anything else in the code. But wouldn't it be beneficial for streams
> reset because of a rescan? Possibly needs to be optional.
Right, that's also discussed, with a similar patch, here:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA%2BhUKG%2Bx2BcqWzBC77cN0ewhzMF0kYhC6c4G_T2gJLPbqYQ6Ow%40mail...
Resetting the distance was a short-sighted mistake: I was thinking
about rescans, the original use case for the reset operation, and
guessing that the data would remain cached. But all the new users of
_reset() have a completely different motivation, namely temporary
exhaustion in their source data, so that guess was simply wrong.
There was also some discussion at the time about whether "reset so I
can rescan", and "reset so I can continue after a temporary stop"
should be different operations requiring different APIs. It now seems
like one operation is sufficient, but it should preserve the distance
as you showed and then let the algorithm learn about already-cached
data in the rescan case (if it is even true then, which is also
debatable since it depends on the size of the scan). So, I think we
should just go ahead and commit a patch like that.
view thread (348+ messages) latest in thread
reply
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: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: index prefetching
In-Reply-To: <CA+hUKG+P0RnG_c4vL6=d8ACwpmux5ZF91FO4UpX8PDu1WqEg9w@mail.gmail.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox