Re: Default fill factor for tables?

From: "Scott Marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: "Richard Broersma" <richard(dot)broersma(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, lists(at)stringsutils(dot)com, "Pgsql General list" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Default fill factor for tables?
Date: 2008-07-11 21:25:29
Message-ID: dcc563d10807111425g6259d628q8c4b3aaae8cc13f5@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 3:24 PM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2008-07-11 at 14:51 -0600, Scott Marlowe wrote:
>
>> I would kindly disagree. I'm looking at a project where HOT updates
>> are going to be a real performance enhancement, but I'll have to
>> create a hundred or so tables ALL with fillfactor tacked on the end.
>
> You clearly think that adjusting fillfactor helps in all cases with HOT.
> I disagree with that, else would have pushed earlier for exactly what
> you suggest. In fact, I've has this exact discussion previously.

How odd, because that's clearly NOT what I said. In fact I used the
single "a" to describe the project I was looking at where having a
default table fill factor of < 100 would be very useful. OTOH, I have
stats databases that have only insert and drop child tables that would
not benefit from < 100 fill factor. For a heavily updated database,
where most of the updates will NOT be on indexed columns, as the ONE
project I'm looking at, a default fill factor would be quite a time
saver.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Simon Riggs 2008-07-11 21:30:19 Re: recovery do not finish
Previous Message Simon Riggs 2008-07-11 21:24:01 Re: Default fill factor for tables?