Re: Default fill factor for tables?
От | Roberts, Jon |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Default fill factor for tables? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1A6E6D554222284AB25ABE3229A92762E9A74C@nrtexcus702.int.asurion.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Default fill factor for tables? (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Default fill factor for tables?
|
Список | pgsql-general |
> Roberts, Jon escribió: > > > Why would you set the fillfactor to anything other than 100 for a > > PostgreSQL table? > > To favor HOT updates. > > -- I can find very little information on hot updates but I found this: http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2006-11/msg00059.php It states, "This design optimizies the updates when none of the index columns are modified and length of the tuple remainsthe same after update." How can a row's length change? I think it must mean the size (in bytes) of the row remains the same. If this is the constraint, then I still don't see the benefit. If the size can vary, I can see the benefit because the newcolumn value may be larger than the old value thus needing the space. Why isn't the hot update documented in these locations? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/interactive/sql-createtable.html http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/interactive/sql-update.html http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/interactive/sql-altertable.html Jon
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: