Re: decoupling table and index vacuum
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: decoupling table and index vacuum |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+TgmoaEDL1cErKJfASgMy_eqOLzA+XDTdD2J_+FCkO1tXc4bQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: decoupling table and index vacuum (Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: decoupling table and index vacuum
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 3:10 AM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com> wrote: > Actually I was not worried about the scan getting slow. What I was > worried about is if we keep ignoring the dead tuples for long time > then in the worst case if we have huge number of dead tuples in the > index maybe 80% to 90% and then suddenly if we get a lot of insertion > for the keys which can not use bottom up deletion (due to the key > range). So now we have a lot of pages which have only dead tuples but > we will still allocate new pages because we ignored the dead tuple % > and did not vacuum for a long time. It seems like a reasonable concern to me ... and I think it's somewhat related to my comments about trying to distinguish which dead tuples matter vs. which don't. -- Robert Haas EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: