Re: Fillfactor for GIN indexes

On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 10:19 AM, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com
> wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 2:03 PM, Michael Paquier
> <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 6:31 AM, Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
> >> On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 4:11 PM, Michael Paquier <
> michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
> >>> I am attaching an updated patch, with the default fillfactor value at
> >>> 75%, and with the page split code using the fillfactor rate.
> >>> Thoughts?
> >> Rewritten version of patch is attached. I made following changes:
> >
> > Thanks! With this patch (and my previous version as well) GIN indexes
> > with default fillfactor have a size higher than 9.4 indexes, 9.4
> > behavior being consistent only with fillfactor=100 and not the default
> > of 90. Are we fine with that?
> IMO, this patch has value to control random updates on GIN indexes,
> but we should have a default fillfactor of 100 to have index size
> consistent with 9.4. Thoughts?
>

I'm not sure. On the one hand it's unclear why fillfactor should be
different from 9.4.
On the other hand it's unclear why it should be different from btree.
I propose marking this "ready for committer". So, committer can make a
final decision.

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