| From: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "Ideriha, Takeshi" <ideriha(dot)takeshi(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Kuntal Ghosh <kuntalghosh(dot)2007(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: GUC for cleanup indexes threshold. |
| Date: | 2017-02-20 06:05:23 |
| Message-ID: | CAD21AoD2bJCZEwpKp5viz2xLCso6vJU67RDhhXnaPM-V+vJqPg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 11:35 AM, Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com> wrote:
> On 2/19/17 7:56 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>>
>> The half-dead pages are never cleaned up if the ratio of pages
>> containing garbage is always lower than threshold. Also in gin index
>> the pending list is never cleared, which become big problem. I guess
>> that we should take action for each type of indexes.
>
>
> What worries me is that each AM is going to have a different notion of what
> needs to happen to support this. That indicates that trying to handle this
> at the vacuum level is not a good idea.
>
> I think it would be wiser to add support for skipping scans to the AM API
> instead. That also means you don't have to add support for this to every
> index type to start with.
Yeah, and it's better to have it as a index storage parameter.
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2017-02-20 06:22:42 | Re: [Bug fix] PQsendQuery occurs error when target_session_attrs is set to read-write |
| Previous Message | Ashutosh Bapat | 2017-02-20 05:24:16 | Re: Parallel Append implementation |