| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jeffrey Baker <jwbaker(at)acm(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Subject: bool / vacuum full bug followup part 2 |
| Date: | 2002-05-04 22:06:38 |
| Message-ID: | 19070.1020549998@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Jeffrey Baker <jwbaker(at)acm(dot)org> writes:
> On Fri, May 03, 2002 at 03:47:54PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> AFAIK there's not a big problem with index growth if the range of index
>> keys remains reasonably static. The problem comes in if you have a
>> range of values that keeps growing (eg, you are indexing a SERIAL or
>> timestamp column). The right end of the btree keeps growing, but
>> there's no mechanism to collapse out no-longer-used space at the left
>> end.
> Wouldn't that explain the complaints I have about my toast tables
> always growing?
It'd explain the indexes growing --- the index key is an OID, which will
keep increasing as you store new toasted values. I thought you'd been
complaining about the tables themselves, though.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeffrey Baker | 2002-05-04 22:17:57 | Re: Subject: bool / vacuum full bug followup part 2 |
| Previous Message | Ron Snyder | 2002-05-04 21:40:07 | Re: Using views and MS access via odbc |