Horton

Re: Multiple FPI_FOR_HINT for the same block during killing btree index items

Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
To: James Coleman <jtc331@gmail.com>
Cc: Masahiko Sawada <masahiko.sawada@2ndquadrant.com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
Date: 2020-04-10T00:32:22Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Thu, Apr 9, 2020 at 5:25 PM Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie> wrote:
> Was this a low cardinality index in the way I describe? If it was,
> then we can hope (and maybe even verify) that the Postgres 12 work
> noticeably ameliorates the problem.

What I really meant was an index where hundreds or even thousands of
rows for each distinct timestamp value are expected. Not an index
where almost every row has a distinct timestamp value. Both timestamp
index patterns are common, obviously.

-- 
Peter Geoghegan

Commits

  1. Avoid killing btree items that are already dead