Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
>> It will certainly not "solve" the problem. What it will do is mean that
>> the breaks are further apart and longer, which seems to me to make the
>> conflict with syncscan behavior worse not better.
> How would it make them longer? They still have the same amount of i/o to do
> scanning the indexes. I suppose they would dirty more pages which might slow
> them down?
More tuples to delete = more writes (in WAL, if not immediately in the
index itself) = longer to complete the indexscan. It's still cheaper
than doing multiple indexscans, of course, but my point is that the
index-fixing work gets concentrated.
regards, tom lane
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Jonah H. Harris||Date: 2008-06-01 14:56:10|
|Subject: Re: Feedback on blog post about Replication Feature decision and its impact|
|Previous:||From: Dirk Riehle||Date: 2008-06-01 13:31:44|
|Subject: Re: Feedback on blog post about Replication Feature
decision and its impact|