Re: [PATCHES] pg_freespacemap question
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
To: Mark Kirkwood <markir@paradise.net.nz>
Cc: Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii@sraoss.co.jp>, peter_e@gmx.net, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, pgsql-patches@postgresql.org
Date: 2006-03-13T13:44:12Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Mark Kirkwood wrote: > Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: > >>The point here is that if tuples require 50 bytes, and there are 20 > >>bytes free on a page, pgstattuple counts 20 free bytes while FSM > >>ignores the page. Recording that space in the FSM will not improve > >>matters, it'll just risk pushing out FSM records for pages that do > >>have useful amounts of free space. > > > >Maybe an overloaded pgstattuple function that allows you to request FSM > >behavior? > > That's a nice idea - could also do equivalently by adding an extra > column "usable_free_space" or some such, and calculating this using FSM > logic. The current pgstattuple function scans the whole table, so I don't think this is a good idea. Re: the overloaded function, I think the behaviors are different enough to merit a separate function, with a different name. -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.