From: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Decibel!" <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Open issues for HOT patch |
Date: | 2007-09-19 08:46:12 |
Message-ID: | 46F0E1D4.1000508@enterprisedb.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Decibel! wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 11:32:52AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Another option would be to prune whenever the free space goes
>>> below table fillfactor and hope that users would set fillfactor so that
>>> atleast one updated tuple can fit in the block. I know its not best to
>>> rely on the users though. But it can be good hint.
>> If default fillfactor weren't 100% then this might be good ;-). But
>
> Erik Jones and I were just talking about FILLFACTOR...
>
> Is the plan to keep it at 100% with HOT? ISTM that's not such a great
> idea, since it forces at least the first update (if not many more) to be
> COLD.
I think we should still keep it at 100%. Most tables are not updated,
and a non-100% fillfactor will be waste of space when the extra space is
not needed. Even a table that is updated should reach a steady state
after a few cold updates. Those cold updates will make room on the pages
for future updates, now that we can prune them and leave only dead line
pointers behind.
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Pavan Deolasee | 2007-09-19 09:11:56 | Re: Open issues for HOT patch |
Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2007-09-19 08:25:39 | Re: Open issues for HOT patch |