Re: Extreme bloating of intarray GiST indexes
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
Cc: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com>, postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2011-05-04T17:45:05Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes: > (c) we *think* that other columns of the table, including other indexed > columns, are changed much more frequently than the intarray column is. > Currently doing analysis on that. Yeah, I noticed that your statistics for the table showed far more updates than insertions or deletions. If the intarray itself didn't change often, that would result in lots of duplicate entries being made in the index. They'd get cleaned by vacuum eventually, but maybe not fast enough to avoid the one-live-tuple-per-page syndrome that Alexander was speculating about. regards, tom lane