From: | James Coleman <jtc331(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
Cc: | Masahiko Sawada <masahiko(dot)sawada(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Multiple FPI_FOR_HINT for the same block during killing btree index items |
Date: | 2020-04-10 13:18:38 |
Message-ID: | CAAaqYe8ku-_Hj6SP=S9FWKEbb+Kj6BGWKT2d=fr_FW8Jx62RDA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Apr 9, 2020 at 10:08 PM Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 9, 2020 at 6:47 PM James Coleman <jtc331(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > I believe the write pattern to this table likely looks like:
> > - INSERT
> > - UPDATE
> > - DELETE
> > for every row. But tomorrow I can do some more digging if needed.
>
> The pg_stats.null_frac for the column/index might be interesting here. I
> believe that Active Record will sometimes generate created_at columns
> that sometimes end up containing NULL values. Not sure why.
null_frac is 0 for created_at (what I expected). Also (under current
data) all created_at values are unique except a single row duplicate.
That being said, remember the write pattern above: every row gets
deleted eventually, so there'd be a lots of dead tuples overall.
James
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jeremy Morton | 2020-04-10 13:19:09 | Re: Support for DATETIMEOFFSET |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2020-04-10 13:01:47 | Re: Improve heavyweight locks instead of building new lock managers? |