Horton

Re: GUC for cleanup indexes threshold.

David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>
To: Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>
Cc: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>, "Ideriha, Takeshi" <ideriha.takeshi@jp.fujitsu.com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Kuntal Ghosh <kuntalghosh.2007@gmail.com>
Date: 2017-03-21T17:29:26Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
Hi,

On 3/15/17 9:50 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> What about if somebody does manual vacuum and there are no garbage
> tuples to clean, won't in that case also you want to avoid skipping
> the lazy_cleanup_index?  Another option could be to skip updating the
> relfrozenxid if we have skipped the index cleanup.

This thread has been idle for six days.  Please respond and/or post a 
new patch by 2017-03-24 00:00 AoE (UTC-12) or this submission will be 
marked "Returned with Feedback".

Thanks,
-- 
-David
david@pgmasters.net

Commits

  1. Fix upper limit for vacuum_cleanup_index_scale_factor

  2. Increase upper limit for vacuum_cleanup_index_scale_factor

  3. Fixes for vacuum_cleanup_index_scale_factor GUC option

  4. Skip full index scan during cleanup of B-tree indexes when possible