Re: [HACKERS] Autovacuum loose ends

On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 17:49:41 -0400
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> wrote:

> On Fri, Aug 12, 2005 at 10:49:43AM -0700, Mark Wong wrote:
> > I thought I'd run a couple of tests to see if it would be helpful
> > against CVS from Aug 3, 2005.
> >
> > Here's a run with autovacuum turned off:
> > http://www.testing.osdl.org/projects/dbt2dev/results/dev4-015/42/
> > 5186.55 notpm
> >
> > Autvacuum on with default settings:
> > http://www.testing.osdl.org/projects/dbt2dev/results/dev4-015/38/
> > 5462.23 notpm
>
> Just noticed what seems to be a bug: in
>
> http://www.testing.osdl.org/projects/dbt2dev/results/dev4-015/42/db/index_info.input
>
> plot "index_info.data" using 1:2 title "i_customer" with lines, \
> "index_info.data" using 1:2 title "i_orders" with lines, \
> "index_info.data" using 1:3 title "pk_customer" with lines, \
> "index_info.data" using 1:4 title "pk_district" with lines, \
> "index_info.data" using 1:5 title "pk_item" with lines, \
> "index_info.data" using 1:6 title "pk_new_order" with lines, \
> "index_info.data" using 1:7 title "pk_order_line" with lines, \
> "index_info.data" using 1:8 title "pk_orders" with lines, \
> "index_info.data" using 1:9 title "pk_stock" with lines, \
> "index_info.data" using 1:11 title "pk_warehouse" with lines
>
> Notice how the subindexes are wrong ... I think it should be 1:3 for
> i_orders, no? Apparently indexes_scan.data has the same problem.

Whoops! I think I fixed it for real now and the charts should be
updated now. It was broken slightly more previously.

> It called my attention that the pk_warehouse index seems to have a very
> different usage in both runs in index_info, but in indexes_scan they
> seem similar.

Thanks,
Mark