Re: DB Tuning Notes for comment...

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Philip Warner <pjw(at)rhyme(dot)com(dot)au>
Cc: Robert Treat <rtreat(at)webmd(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: DB Tuning Notes for comment...
Date: 2002-12-10 01:15:30
Message-ID: 21510.1039482930@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Philip Warner <pjw(at)rhyme(dot)com(dot)au> writes:
> At 03:54 PM 9/12/2002 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> FSM entries aren't needed for sequences either, so more correct is
>>
>> select count(*) from pg_class where relkind in ('r', 't');

> presumably:

> select count(*) from pg_class where relkind in ('r', 't', 'i');

No, I meant what I said. Indexes don't use the FSM. (The premise of
the FSM is that one bit of free space in a table is as good as any other
bit; a premise quite incorrect for indexes.)

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Philip Warner 2002-12-10 01:17:48 Re: DB Tuning Notes for comment...
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2002-12-10 01:08:49 Re: PostgreSQL 7.3 Installation on SCO