MIME-Version: 1.0
References: 
 <CABPTF7VtSYmC5LZSnkJWYn9PCkxgOJd9QbtAM79qftBK-fbA4w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABPTF7UVCkub6jFXVk-qrYd4xjgiwRt1FTFL2=rBVV9SYcgfkQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <aa_yTTUpxOCFdQ2x@paquier.xyz>
 <dmf5ladi2amq656myv7zjl4pj4u3v2cp3azteliauifxizljej@bmwabkp5hdpi>
 <CABPTF7XFEOHpbju_pjCFHDffP_rWJU-405c6aoQdx4JjCOBimA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABPTF7X3RBkmOnQAoLbK-tr6o-+27fNpKPgzYZHhQCuYbP=rGA@mail.gmail.com>
 <abHflCRN5CM0d8Dc@paquier.xyz> <abI2JBc5J_Erlgqr@paquier.xyz>
 <CABPTF7Wz8OCcr2f1CSdt-jRHfJAAdXZwwBokBD4baZAPyK7CgA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABPTF7UA3sEw1ZpAj8qAKY6Xs71sk41X-pV43_iZHZz2U_AP=Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <abNtReiW-Y8NqxGg@paquier.xyz>
In-Reply-To: <abNtReiW-Y8NqxGg@paquier.xyz>
From: Xuneng Zhou <xunengzhou@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2026 10:39:52 +0800
Message-ID: 
 <CABPTF7XxdAA681duGKgWx-eLC1skR3giuebcw4+-0GkOVZm-pw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Streamify more code paths
To: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>,
 pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>,
	Nazir Bilal Yavuz <byavuz81@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CABPTF7XxdAA681duGKgWx-eLC1skR3giuebcw4%2B-0GkOVZm-pw%40mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Mar 13, 2026 at 9:50=E2=80=AFAM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xy=
z> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 12, 2026 at 11:35:48PM +0800, Xuneng Zhou wrote:
> > Our io_time metric currently measures only read time and ignores write
> > I/O, which can be misleading. We now separate it into read_time and
> > write_time.
>
> I had a look at the pgstatindex part this morning, running my own test
> under conditions similar to 6c228755add8, and here's one extract with
> io_uring:
> pgstatindex (100k tuples) base=3D32938.2ms patch=3D83.3ms 395.60x ( 99.7%=
)
> (reads=3D2745->173, io_time=3D32932.09->59.75ms)

This result looks great!

> There was one issue with a declaration put in the middle of the code,
> that I have fixed.  This one is now done, remains 3 pieces to
> evaluate.

Thanks for fixing this and for taking the time to review and test the patch=
es.

--
Best,
Xuneng