MIME-Version: 1.0
References: 
 <CAN55FZ02eR083kPV_8_boWEJphXZW=-hRxJKp7nwR-WomyKb6g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABPTF7VSa5L=k6ONVUZHfRrO2Y2_iYz6npWj0Na69RoCvSevpQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABPTF7V3+QGC+0W9ERCcAY14jq_w_XvmwrRs9vXbi_oqv4FnTQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABPTF7VyePb8O-WDgs2hCCXYhZzGzdjg0N3NkxojZ=ke4SB3pA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAN55FZ39HSsXKTSi66ASq+i4Ed5FuGXD11hmJ+8c0F0O0+ozew@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABPTF7Vd4JWSHi9N7pGTzn6xmOdtAToCe1NGbZAH8U9_mXOqpw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABPTF7W-f_zPN442FCp4Xaopi721oDmGYimq=VhAk=F7jwYZDQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABPTF7VUaRnvsXqa+628YkuR4oPVRr1mR2seXTkxabfiqQ3NHw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABPTF7VtSYmC5LZSnkJWYn9PCkxgOJd9QbtAM79qftBK-fbA4w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABPTF7UVCkub6jFXVk-qrYd4xjgiwRt1FTFL2=rBVV9SYcgfkQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <aa_yTTUpxOCFdQ2x@paquier.xyz>
 <CABPTF7XD51Qx2043p80npKmYEd67qMagK5AW=s6LNXyZt5s2nw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAN55FZ3u_PSXX26pXJi8mo1-ykezV1L=GuFhfrGq73TCASeuyA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAN55FZ3u_PSXX26pXJi8mo1-ykezV1L=GuFhfrGq73TCASeuyA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Xuneng Zhou <xunengzhou@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2026 11:27:10 +0800
Message-ID: 
 <CABPTF7Vjor4HhGZrgyTQ-+_ZC4Cu7V_4NOKf1T-f42q_oWxbag@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Streamify more code paths
To: Nazir Bilal Yavuz <byavuz81@gmail.com>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>,
 pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CABPTF7Vjor4HhGZrgyTQ-%2B_ZC4Cu7V_4NOKf1T-f42q_oWxbag%40mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

Hi,

On Wed, Mar 11, 2026 at 3:53=E2=80=AFPM Nazir Bilal Yavuz <byavuz81@gmail.c=
om> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, 10 Mar 2026 at 16:23, Xuneng Zhou <xunengzhou@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Another code path that showed significant performance improvement is
> > pgstatindex [1]. I've incorporated the test into the script too. Here
> > are the results from my testing:
> >
> > method=3Dworker io-workers=3D12
> > pgstatindex_large          base=3D   233.8ms  patch=3D    54.1ms   4.32=
x
> > ( 76.8%)  (reads=3D27460=E2=86=921757, io_time=3D213.94=E2=86=926.31ms)
> >
> > method=3Dio_uring
> > pgstatindex_large          base=3D   224.2ms  patch=3D    56.4ms   3.98=
x
> > ( 74.9%)  (reads=3D27460=E2=86=921757, io_time=3D204.41=E2=86=924.88ms)
>
> I didn't run the benchmark yet but here is a small suggestion for the
> pgstatindex patch:
>
> +    p.current_blocknum =3D BTREE_METAPAGE + 1;
> +    p.last_exclusive =3D nblocks;
>
>      for (blkno =3D 1; blkno < nblocks; blkno++)
>
> ...
>
> +    p.current_blocknum =3D HASH_METAPAGE + 1;
> +    p.last_exclusive =3D nblocks;
>
>      for (blkno =3D 1; blkno < nblocks; blkno++)
>
> Could you move 'BTREE_METAPAGE + 1' and 'HASH_METAPAGE + 1' into
> variables and then set p.current_blocknum and blkno using those
> variables? p.current_blocknum and blkno should have the same initial
> values, this change makes code less error prone and easier to read in
> my opinion.
>
> Other than the comment above, LGTM.
>

Thanks! That makes sense to me. Please see the patch I=E2=80=99ll post late=
r.

--=20
Best,
Xuneng