Re: GUC for cleanup indexes threshold.
Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>
From: Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>
To: Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@bluetreble.com>
Cc: 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: 2017-02-20T06:05:23Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 11:35 AM, Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@bluetreble.com> wrote: > On 2/19/17 7:56 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: >> >> The half-dead pages are never cleaned up if the ratio of pages >> containing garbage is always lower than threshold. Also in gin index >> the pending list is never cleared, which become big problem. I guess >> that we should take action for each type of indexes. > > > What worries me is that each AM is going to have a different notion of what > needs to happen to support this. That indicates that trying to handle this > at the vacuum level is not a good idea. > > I think it would be wiser to add support for skipping scans to the AM API > instead. That also means you don't have to add support for this to every > index type to start with. Yeah, and it's better to have it as a index storage parameter. Regards, -- Masahiko Sawada NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION NTT Open Source Software Center
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