Re: Frequent Update Project: Design Overview of HOT Updates

> > I think the vision is that the overflow table would never be very
> > large because it can be vacuumed very aggressively. It has only
tuples
> > that are busy and will need vacuuming as soon as a transaction ends.

> > Unlike the main table which is mostly tuples that don't need
> > vacuuming.

Except when deleted :-)

> Thats right. vacuum if it gets a chance to work on the
> overflow relation seems to be doing a decent job in our runs.
> If autovacuum/vacuum gets to run optimally, the FSM
> information generated for the overflow relations will be able
> to serve a lot of new tuple requests  avoiding  undue/large
> bloat in the overflow relations.

It seems like we would want to create a chain into overflow for deleted
rows also (header + all cols null), so we can vacuum those too only by
looking
at overflow, at least optionally.

I think the overflow would really need to solve deletes too, or the
bitmap
idea is more generally useful to vacuum.

Generally for clear distinction I think we are talking about two things
here.
1. reduce index bloat and maintenance work
2. allow vaccuum a cheaper focus on what needs to be done

Andreas