From: | Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru> |
---|---|
To: | Anastasia Lubennikova <lubennikovaav(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> |
Subject: | Re: Microvacuum for gist. Question about GISTPageOpaqueData flag |
Date: | 2015-07-27 15:46:55 |
Message-ID: | 55B6526F.9050409@sigaev.ru |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> I need an advice, what would be better:
> - to add new flag like F_HAS_GARBAGE,
> - or to delete all mentions of F_TUPLES_DELETED and use it in gist microvacuum.
According to commit message:
commit 2effb72e682a7dbdc9a8a60a80c22ec1fa9d8079
Author: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)iki(dot)fi>
Date: Fri Nov 7 15:03:46 2014 +0200
..
The code that generated a record to clear the F_TUPLES_DELETED flag hasn't
existed since we got rid of old-style VACUUM FULL. I kept the code that sets
the flag, although it's not used for anything anymore, because it might
still be interesting information for debugging purposes that some tuples
have been deleted from a page.
..
If Heikki doesn't change his opinion then introduce new flag. Although I don't
think that we need to keep F_TUPLES_DELETED.
Teodor Sigaev E-mail: teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru
WWW: http://www.sigaev.ru/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2015-07-27 16:05:28 | Re: Microvacuum for gist. Question about GISTPageOpaqueData flag |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2015-07-27 15:39:01 | Re: optimizing vacuum truncation scans |