Re: Fillfactor for GIN indexes

From: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Fillfactor for GIN indexes
Date: 2015-01-15 07:19:08
Message-ID: CAB7nPqTwZJS=8ty=-KXupXTZigoz+rXUEJ-OV6bGRYqmkdfpmQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 2:03 PM, Michael Paquier
<michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 6:31 AM, Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 4:11 PM, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
>>> I am attaching an updated patch, with the default fillfactor value at
>>> 75%, and with the page split code using the fillfactor rate.
>>> Thoughts?
>> Rewritten version of patch is attached. I made following changes:
>
> Thanks! With this patch (and my previous version as well) GIN indexes
> with default fillfactor have a size higher than 9.4 indexes, 9.4
> behavior being consistent only with fillfactor=100 and not the default
> of 90. Are we fine with that?
IMO, this patch has value to control random updates on GIN indexes,
but we should have a default fillfactor of 100 to have index size
consistent with 9.4. Thoughts?
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2015-01-15 07:21:21 Re: Compression of full-page-writes
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2015-01-15 07:17:02 Re: [PATCH] add ssl_protocols configuration option