Re: [PoC] Improve dead tuple storage for lazy vacuum

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Yura Sokolov <y(dot)sokolov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [PoC] Improve dead tuple storage for lazy vacuum
Date: 2021-07-30 19:48:26
Message-ID: CA+TgmoaVp=C-Wbbo+4oD5eFM7J_uUf+arwB+RBhdika1kb5WCg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Jul 30, 2021 at 3:34 PM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> The lower memory usage also often will result in a better cache
> utilization - which is a crucial factor for index vacuuming when the
> index order isn't correlated with the heap order. Cache misses really
> are a crucial performance factor there.

Fair enough.

--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2021-07-30 19:52:31 Re: Asynchronous and "direct" IO support for PostgreSQL.
Previous Message Robert Haas 2021-07-30 19:47:53 Re: Have I found an interval arithmetic bug?