From: | Leonardo Francalanci <m_lists(at)yahoo(dot)it> |
---|---|
To: | Andrew Sullivan <ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca> |
Cc: | pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: FILLFACTOR and increasing index |
Date: | 2011-05-09 14:32:38 |
Message-ID: | 882255.95173.qm@web29015.mail.ird.yahoo.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
> > I have an index on a timestamp value that is inserted, for 90%
> > of the inserts, in increasing order. No updates, no deletes on the
> > table (appends only).
>
> The bit about "increasing order" is a red herring here. If you have
> no updates, then you can leave the FILLFACTOR alone.
>
> FILLFACTOR controls how much extra room there is in the way the table
> is stored, so that if a row is UPDATEd it might be possible to store
> the row in the same disk page. This alleviates certain pathological
> conditions with high-UPDATE tables and the way Postgres stores the
> data (the non-overwriting storage manager).
(please add the list when replying to emails)
I'm talking about the index fillfactor, not the table fillfactor...
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | zhong ming wu | 2011-05-09 14:35:54 | stunnel with just postgresql client part |
Previous Message | Gabriele Bartolini | 2011-05-09 13:44:41 | Re: Streaming replication info |