Re: gist vacuum gist access

On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 11:13 AM, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com
> wrote:

> On 09/07/2014 05:11 PM, Костя Кузнецов wrote:
>
>> hello.
>> i recode vacuum for gist index.
>> all tests is ok.
>> also i test vacuum on table size 2 million rows. all is ok.
>> on my machine old vaccum work about 9 second. this version work about 6-7
>> sec .
>> review please.
>>
>
> If I'm reading this correctly, the patch changes gistbulkdelete to scan
> the index in physical order, while the old code starts from the root and
> scans the index from left to right, in logical order.
>
> Scanning the index in physical order is wrong, if any index pages are
> split while vacuum runs. A page split could move some tuples to a
> lower-numbered page, so that the vacuum will not scan those tuples.
>
> In the b-tree code, we solved that problem back in 2006, so it can be done
> but requires a bit more code. In b-tree, we solved it with a "vacuum cycle
> ID" number that's set on the page halves when a page is split. That allows
> VACUUM to identify pages that have been split concurrently sees them, and
> "jump back" to vacuum them too. See commit http://git.postgresql.org/
> gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=commit;h=5749f6ef0cc1c67ef9c9ad2108b3d9
> 7b82555c80. It should be possible to do something similar in GiST, and in
> fact you might be able to reuse the NSN field that's already set on the
> page halves on split, instead of adding a new "vacuum cycle ID".

Idea is right. But in fact, does GiST ever recycle any page? It has
F_DELETED flag, but ISTM this flag is never set. So, I think it's possible
that this patch is working correctly. However, probably GiST sometimes
leaves new page unused due to server crash.
Anyway, I'm not fan of committing patch in this shape. We need to let GiST
recycle pages first, then implement VACUUM similar to b-tree.

------
With best regards,
Alexander Korotkov.