Re: REINDEX : new parameter to preserve current average leaf density as new implicit FILLFACTOR

From: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>
To: John Lumby <johnlumby(at)hotmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: REINDEX : new parameter to preserve current average leaf density as new implicit FILLFACTOR
Date: 2019-07-08 19:19:03
Message-ID: CAH2-WzmvwNv81Ad1qU8yvSf8zPHtyNmLJRArwif_3PgdiLiSvg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 12:10 PM John Lumby <johnlumby(at)hotmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Actually the test workload does not run any explicit VACUUM command,
> it relies on autovacuum with these settings
> (same settings for 9.4 and 12beta2)

> To correspond to your " more churn between each VACUUM"
> Would you then suggest increasing
> autovacuum_vacuum_cost_delay and/or autovacuum_vacuum_scale_factor?

Well, you're still running autovacuum very aggressively here. It'll
easily keep up when run on a relatively small table such as this.

BTW, you should definitely run the latest point release of 9.4 -- not
9.4.6. You're missing years of bug fixes by sticking to such an old
point release, including some rather nasty ones -- 9.4.23 is the
current 9.4 point release. Actually, 9.4 is going to lose support this
year, as the oldest stable version that's currently supported by the
community.

--
Peter Geoghegan

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Mercha 2019-07-08 19:20:25 Re: Measuring the Query Optimizer Effect: Turning off the QO?
Previous Message Tom Mercha 2019-07-08 19:17:00 Re: Measuring the Query Optimizer Effect: Turning off the QO?