Re: Optimize SnapBuildPurgeOlderTxn: use in-place compaction instead of temporary array - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Xuneng Zhou
Subject Re: Optimize SnapBuildPurgeOlderTxn: use in-place compaction instead of temporary array
Date
Msg-id CABPTF7UKaXP+1-jMg7yXWrj+C07ZvDitDpLF6UeCQUAFGO4nYw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Optimize SnapBuildPurgeOlderTxn: use in-place compaction instead of temporary array  (Neil Chen <carpenter.nail.cz@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Optimize SnapBuildPurgeOlderTxn: use in-place compaction instead of temporary array
List pgsql-hackers
Hi Neil,

On Thu, Jan 8, 2026 at 4:49 PM Neil Chen <carpenter.nail.cz@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Xuneng,
>
> On Thu, Jan 8, 2026 at 4:15 PM Xuneng Zhou <xunengzhou@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> v3-0001 fixes a critical issue where the snapshot->xip array in
>> SnapBuildBuildSnapshot might not be sorted before reaching the
>> consistent state. Sorry for the noise here.
>>
>
> I’ve given this patch a cursory review, and it looks good overall.
> Considering the impact of this change, should we add a regression test for it, or provide a unit test to ensure the
correctnessof the modification? 
> I think it would be more receptive to merging such a "subtle performance optimization" only when its correctness is
fullyguaranteed. 

Thanks for your review. I think we can add a tap test for it.

--
Best,
Xuneng



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Proposal: SELECT * EXCLUDE (...) command
Next
From: Fujii Masao
Date:
Subject: Re: [BUG] CRASH: ECPGprepared_statement() and ECPGdeallocate_all() when connection is NULL