RE: Vacuum only with 20% old tuples
Hiroshi Inoue <inoue@tpf.co.jp>
From: "Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue@tpf.co.jp>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, "Bruce Momjian" <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Cc: "PostgreSQL-development" <pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org>
Date: 2000-07-12T03:10:09Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> -----Original Message----- > From: pgsql-hackers-owner@hub.org [mailto:pgsql-hackers-owner@hub.org]On > Behalf Of Tom Lane > > Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes: > > I suggest that we change vacuum to only move remove tuples if there is > > more than 20% expired tuples. > > > When we do vacuum, we drop all indexes and recreate them. > > > This fixes the complaint about vacuum slowness when there are many > > expired rows in the table. We know this is causes by excessive index > > updates. It allows indexes to shrink (Jan pointed this out to me.) And > > it fixes the TOAST problem with TOAST values in indexes. > > We can't "drop and recreate" without a solution to the relation > versioning issue (unless you are prepared to accept a nonfunctional > database after a failure partway through index rebuild on a system > table). I think we should do this, but it's not all that simple... > Is this topic independent of WAL in the first place ? Regards. Hiroshi Inoue