| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Jesper Pedersen <jesper(dot)pedersen(at)redhat(dot)com>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Mithun Cy <mithun(dot)cy(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Hash Indexes |
| Date: | 2016-12-02 18:43:07 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoaRDHEUVTMXgDhcX4eDeLG2W_A6iV=cc95PFN2M8WkA8g@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 1:54 AM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> I want to split when the average bucket
>> contains 10 pages worth of tuples.
>
> oh, I think what you mean to say is hack the code to bump fill factor
> and then test it. I was confused that how can user can do that from
> SQL command.
Yes, that's why I said "hacking the fill factor up to 1000" when I
originally mentioned it.
Actually, for hash indexes, there's no reason why we couldn't allow
fillfactor settings greater than 100, and it might be useful.
Possibly it should be the default. Not 1000, certainly, but I'm not
sure that the current value of 75 is at all optimal. The optimal
value might be 100 or 125 or 150 or something like that.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2016-12-02 19:22:00 | Re: patch: function xmltable |
| Previous Message | Petr Jelinek | 2016-12-02 18:40:19 | Re: Logical Replication WIP |