| From: | Frédéric Yhuel <frederic(dot)yhuel(at)dalibo(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Benoit Lobréau <benoit(dot)lobreau(at)dalibo(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: doc: explain pgstatindex fragmentation |
| Date: | 2025-01-24 14:41:46 |
| Message-ID: | 9d0f1ea7-f2b1-46e1-8b99-d1d142b53b2d@dalibo.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 1/24/25 14:58, Laurenz Albe wrote:
> On Fri, 2025-01-24 at 13:34 +0000, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
>> + Since indexes have a default fillfactor of 90, this should be around 0.9 for
>> + newly built indexes
>>
>> I think 0.9 should be replaced by 90 (that's the actual kind of output we'd get).
>>
Damn! I missed that one too...
>> But having said that, I'm not sure we should mention those 90 stuff because it
>> depends of the amount of data indexed (I mean if the index has a very few
>> leaf pages, say < 5, then it's easy to be << 90 since it's an average). That's
>> probably not the majority of indexes though so maybe just nuance the sentence a
>> bit.
>
> Sorry about the 0.9.
>
> Perhaps the wording could be more careful: ... this should be around 90 for
> most newly built indexes of non-neglectable size.
>
It looks good to me (apart from the typo). v4 attached
Thanks! :-)
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| v4-0001-doc-explain-pgstatindex-fragmentation.patch | text/x-patch | 1.8 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2025-01-24 14:53:09 | Re: Orphaned users in PG16 and above can only be managed by Superusers |
| Previous Message | Alexander Kuzmenkov | 2025-01-24 14:40:03 | Re: Quadratic planning time for ordered paths over partitioned tables |