Re: ToDo List Item - System Table Index Clustering
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
To: Simone Aiken <saiken@ulfheim.net>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2011-01-18T13:35:58Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Commits
Same data as JSON:
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Add new buffers_backend_fsync field to pg_stat_bgwriter.
- 3134d8863e84 9.1.0 cited
Excerpts from Simone Aiken's message of dom ene 16 02:11:26 -0300 2011: > > Hello Postgres Hackers, > > In reference to this todo item about clustering system table indexes, > ( http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2004-05/msg00989.php ) > I have been studying the system tables to see which would benefit from > clustering. I have some index suggestions and a question if you have a > moment. Wow, this is really old stuff. I don't know if this is really of any benefit, given that these catalogs are loaded into syscaches anyway. Furthermore, if you cluster at initdb time, they will soon lose the ordering, given that updates move tuples around and inserts put them anywhere. So you'd need the catalogs to be re-clustered once in a while, and I don't see how you'd do that (except by asking the user to do it, which doesn't sound so great). I think you need some more discussion on the operational details before engaging in the bootstrap bison stuff (unless you just want to play with Bison for educational purposes, of course, which is always a good thing to do). -- Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support