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

Re: [PATCHES] pg_freespacemap question

From: Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>, markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz,alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com, peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net,pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] pg_freespacemap question
Date: 2006-03-13 03:29:44
Message-ID: 4414E728.6080103@familyhealth.com.au (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
> The point here is that if tuples require 50 bytes, and there are 20
> bytes free on a page, pgstattuple counts 20 free bytes while FSM
> ignores the page.  Recording that space in the FSM will not improve
> matters, it'll just risk pushing out FSM records for pages that do
> have useful amounts of free space.


Maybe an overloaded pgstattuple function that allows you to request FSM 
behavior?

Chris


In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Mark KirkwoodDate: 2006-03-13 04:37:00
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] pg_freespacemap question
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2006-03-13 03:15:07
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] pg_freespacemap question

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2006-03-13 04:24:35
Subject: Re: fix of some issues with multi-line query editing
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2006-03-13 03:15:07
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] pg_freespacemap question

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