Re: Automatic free space map filling

From: Ron Mayer <rm_pg(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com>
To: "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Automatic free space map filling
Date: 2006-03-05 00:23:47
Message-ID: 440A2F93.6070701@cheapcomplexdevices.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> ... how many pages per bit ...

Are we trying to set up a complex solution to a problem
that'll be mostly moot once partitioning is easier and
partitioned tables are common?

In many cases I can think of the bulk of the data would be in
old partitions that are practically never written to (so would
need no vacuuming and could always use index-only lookups);
while the hot parts of large tables would be on partitions
that would need frequent vacuuming and wouldn't benefit
from index-only lookups.

In these cases, 1 bit per partition would work well,
and seems a lot easier to keep track of than bits-per-page.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2006-03-05 01:48:29 Re: Is TG_NARGS/TG_ARGV just legacy, or what?
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2006-03-04 23:59:59 Re: Is TG_NARGS/TG_ARGV just legacy, or what?