Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Extreme bloating of intarray GiST indexes

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Cc: postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Extreme bloating of intarray GiST indexes
Date: 2011-04-28 20:01:59
Message-ID: 2755.1304020919@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
> I'm currently looking at a database which has some extreme bloating of
> intarray GiST indexes.  As in 1000% bloating in only a few months.  This
> is not a particularly high-transaction-rate database, so the bloating is
> a little surprising; I can only explain it if vacuum wasn't cleaning the
> indexes at all, and maybe not even then.

> We're currently instrumenting the database so that we can collect a bit
> more data on update activity, but in the meantime, has anyone seen
> anything like this?

1. What PG version?
2. If new enough to have contrib/pgstattuple, what does pgstattuple()
   have to say about the index?

I'm suspicious that this might be bloat caused by a bad picksplit function,
not from having a lot of dead entries in the index.  We've fixed several
other bogus picksplit functions in contrib in the past.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2011-04-28 20:05:19
Subject: Re: pgsql: Fix pg_size_pretty() to avoid overflow for inputs close to INT64
Previous:From: Dave PageDate: 2011-04-28 19:57:14
Subject: Re: pgsql: Fix pg_size_pretty() to avoid overflow for inputs close to INT64

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group