Re: GUC for cleanup indexes threshold.
Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
From: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
To: Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>,
Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@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: 2017-02-25T03:38:10Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Sat, Feb 25, 2017 at 3:40 AM, Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie> wrote: > On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 9:26 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: >> I think this thread is pretty short on evidence that would let us make >> a smart decision about what to do here. I see three possibilities. >> The first is that this patch is a good idea whether we do something >> about the issue of half-dead pages or not. The second is that this >> patch is a good idea if we do something about the issue of half-dead >> pages but a bad idea if we don't. The third is that this patch is a >> bad idea whether or not we do anything about the issue of half-dead >> pages. > +1. I think we can track the stats from IndexBulkDeleteResult->pages_free to see the impact of the patch. > Half-dead pages are not really relevant to this discussion, AFAICT. I > think that both you and Simon mean "recyclable" pages. > Yes, I think so and I think that is just confusion about terminology. -- With Regards, Amit Kapila. EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
Commits
-
Fix upper limit for vacuum_cleanup_index_scale_factor
- 4d54543efa5e 11.0 landed
-
Increase upper limit for vacuum_cleanup_index_scale_factor
- 6ca33a885bf8 11.0 landed
-
Fixes for vacuum_cleanup_index_scale_factor GUC option
- 9a994e37e08d 11.0 landed
-
Skip full index scan during cleanup of B-tree indexes when possible
- 857f9c36cda5 11.0 landed