is this index bloat?

From: Patrick Hatcher <PHatcher(at)macys(dot)com>
To: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: is this index bloat?
Date: 2005-02-02 17:58:51
Message-ID: OFBB9AD7E4.AA331175-ON88256F9C.0060B5AA-88256F9C.0062E8DA@fds.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

PG=7.4.5

I guess I never noticed this during vacuum verbose before, but is it common
for the index to be 2 to 3 times the number of rows in a table? I've tried
reindexing and then dropping and readding them. Still the same number of
rows.
Indexes are all btree

mdc_oz=# select count(*) from kst;
count
-------
919
(1 row)

mdc_oz=# vacuum full verbose analyze kst;
INFO: vacuuming "public.kst"
INFO: "kst": found 0 removable, 2757 nonremovable row versions in 64 pages
DETAIL: 1838 dead row versions cannot be removed yet.
Nonremovable row versions range from 141 to 235 bytes long.
There were 0 unused item pointers.
Total free space (including removable row versions) is 9112 bytes.
0 pages are or will become empty, including 0 at the end of the table.
8 pages containing 5328 free bytes are potential move destinations.
CPU 0.00s/0.00u sec elapsed 0.00 sec.
INFO: index "xie1kst" now contains 2757 row versions in 9 pages
DETAIL: 0 index pages have been deleted, 0 are currently reusable.
CPU 0.00s/0.00u sec elapsed 0.00 sec.
INFO: index "xie2kst" now contains 2757 row versions in 9 pages
DETAIL: 0 index pages have been deleted, 0 are currently reusable.
CPU 0.00s/0.00u sec elapsed 0.00 sec.
INFO: index "kst_dpt_pk" now contains 2757 row versions in 9 pages
DETAIL: 0 index pages have been deleted, 0 are currently reusable.
CPU 0.00s/0.00u sec elapsed 0.00 sec.
INFO: "kst": moved 0 row versions, truncated 64 to 64 pages
DETAIL: CPU 0.00s/0.00u sec elapsed 0.00 sec.
INFO: analyzing "public.kst"
INFO: "kst": 64 pages, 919 rows sampled, 919 estimated total rows
VACUUM

# - Free Space Map -

max_fsm_pages = 3000000 # min max_fsm_relations*16, 6 bytes each
max_fsm_relations = 500 # min 100, ~50 bytes each

TIA

Patrick Hatcher

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Lonni J Friedman 2005-02-02 18:17:09 Re: capturing/viewing sort_mem utilization on a per query basis
Previous Message Tom Lane 2005-02-02 17:58:49 Re: capturing/viewing sort_mem utilization on a per query basis