Re: [HACKERS] GUC for cleanup indexes threshold.

On 15 February 2017 at 08:07, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> It's a bug. Attached latest version patch, which passed make check.

In its current form, I'm not sure this is a good idea. Problems...

1. I'm pretty sure the world doesn't need another VACUUM parameter

I suggest that we use the existing vacuum scale factor/4 to reflect
that indexes are more sensitive to bloat.

2. The current btree vacuum code requires 2 vacuums to fully reuse
half-dead pages. So skipping an index vacuum might mean that second
index scan never happens at all, which would be bad.

I suggest that we store the number of half-dead pages in the metapage
after each VACUUM, so we can decide whether to skip the scan or not.
And we use some math like each half-dead page that needs to be reused
is worth 250 index entries, so the decision to skip is based upon rows
and empty pages, not just recently vacuumed rows.

-- 
Simon Riggs                http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services