Csaba Nagy wrote:
> One additional thought: what about a kind of "segment fill factor" ?
> Meaning: each segment has some free space reserved for future
> updates/inserts of records in the same range of it's partitioning
> constraint. And when inserting/updating you put the new record into the
> corresponding segment... just like a very coarse clustering.
Hm.. yeah. That way, a few writes to a "read optimized" segment could be
accepted, without having to drop the optimization immediately. And the
other way around: generally prevent having to drop the optimization by
forcing tuples to be written to a segment with matching min/max tuples.
Although, that's not exactly trivial, I think.
However, for tables which don't fit the use case of SE, people certainly
don't want such a fill factor to bloat their tables.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Doug Knight||Date: 2008-01-07 13:07:32|
|Subject: Re: Tuning Postgresql on Windows XP Pro 32 bit|
|Previous:||From: Alvaro Herrera||Date: 2008-01-07 12:18:24|
|Subject: Re: Bug: Unreferenced temp tables disables vacuum toupdate xid|