Re: Unbalanced Btree Indices ...

From: "Arthur Ward" <award(at)dominionsciences(dot)com>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Unbalanced Btree Indices ...
Date: 2004-03-21 17:48:26
Message-ID: 47982.68.62.129.152.1079891306.squirrel@award.gotdns.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:
>> Pointers to docs that I'm not finding most acceptable ...
>
> There aren't any, because at the time the 7.4 docs were being prepared,
> we didn't have enough field experience to know whether its version of
> index compaction would eliminate the practical need for REINDEX or not.
> So the docs are intentionally vague.
>
> We still haven't gotten a lot of feedback about the point from 7.4
> users. Maybe no news is good news, or maybe it isn't ...

While upgrading from 7.4.1 to 7.4.2 last week, our production system
dropped at least 2GB during a vacuum full, and a reindex following that
also dropped about 2GB. Does that count as index bloat? It "feels" like
it's much better than 7.3.x, but it could also be my imagination. I wasn't
watching the details of the vacuum since I was mostly interested in
whether pg_autovacuum was keeping up and/or whether our FSM settings
needed an increase.

If there's some particular metric for index bloat that you can rattle off
the top of your head, I'll be glad to report back on it in another weekend
or two, when we've had some time to build up some bloat again.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2004-03-21 17:53:33 Reporting errors inside plpgsql/SPI queries
Previous Message Sailesh Krishnamurthy 2004-03-21 17:35:37 Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] Sync vs. fsync during