Re: decoupling table and index vacuum

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: decoupling table and index vacuum
Date: 2021-04-24 18:43:12
Message-ID: 20210424184312.pkmzao6iohl5letf@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On 2021-04-24 11:21:49 -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> To expand on this a bit, my objection to counting the number of live
> tuples in the index (as a means to determining how aggressively each
> individual index needs to be vacuumed) is this: it's driven by
> positive feedback, not negative feedback. We should focus on *extreme*
> adverse events (e.g., version-driven page splits) instead. We don't
> even need to understand ordinary adverse events (e.g., how many dead
> tuples are in the index).

I don't see how that's good enough as a general approach. It won't work
on indexes that insert on one end, delete from the other (think
inserted_at or serial primary keys in many workloads).

Greetings,

Andres Freund

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Geoghegan 2021-04-24 18:59:29 Re: decoupling table and index vacuum
Previous Message Peter Geoghegan 2021-04-24 18:21:49 Re: decoupling table and index vacuum