Re: [GENERAL] Index size
От | Christophe Pettus |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [GENERAL] Index size |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 22BF390A-7248-4BE7-9930-FD51E8EF4CA8@thebuild.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [GENERAL] Index size (Melvin Davidson <melvin6925@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
> On Dec 11, 2016, at 08:37, Melvin Davidson <melvin6925@gmail.com> wrote: > > Yes, I see your point, but the case where the row does not fit into the same block > would only occur with unlimited field types such as var[], bytea[], etc. No, that's not correct either. A block can fill up for any number of reasons: Dead tuples, a long HOT chain, or just a lotof data packed into the block. The first UPDATE to a tuple in a block that was populated by continuous INSERTs or a COPY,if the table is using the default fillfactor, will cause the new tuple to be written to a different block, which willcause an index update. The important thing to remember is that the process you are describing (in which indexes are not updated unless a columninvolved in the index changes) is an optimization, Heap-Only Tuples. It's a very common optimization, but it's notguaranteed. -- -- Christophe Pettus xof@thebuild.com
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: