Skip to content

Conversation

@percona-mhansson
Copy link
Contributor

A follow up fix for "Bug#36775910: Record buffer not set in index range scans" [2969af5] caused a performance regression by failing to respect the handler's recommendation to cap the number of rows in the record buffer (at the time of writing hard-coded to 100 for InnoDB). This caused a performance regression which is most pronounced when using a small LIMIT.

Fixed by re-introducing the line implementing cap.

particular index scan scenario

A follow up fix for "Bug#36775910: Record buffer not set in index range scans"
[2969af5] caused a performance regression by failing to respect the handler's
recommendation to cap the number of rows in the record buffer (at the time of
writing hard-coded to 100 for InnoDB). This caused a performance regression
which is most pronounced when using a small LIMIT.

Fixed by re-introducing the line implementing cap.
Copy link
Collaborator

@inikep inikep left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@percona-mhansson percona-mhansson merged commit a57fefe into percona:8.0 Dec 10, 2025
23 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants