Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9134C64FF7E for ; Wed, 23 Jul 2008 10:40:01 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 93847-02 for ; Wed, 23 Jul 2008 10:39:48 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from hook.sigaev.ru (hook.sigaev.ru [212.192.243.50]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA3F264FCCC for ; Wed, 23 Jul 2008 10:39:53 -0300 (ADT) Received: by hook.sigaev.ru (Postfix, from userid 1003) id 4A7A839909; Wed, 23 Jul 2008 17:39:55 +0400 (MSD) Received: from xor.sai.msu.ru (mx.pragmatic.ru [80.244.231.102]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hook.sigaev.ru (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C08C398E2; Wed, 23 Jul 2008 17:39:49 +0400 (MSD) Message-ID: <488734A5.9030503@sigaev.ru> Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2008 17:39:49 +0400 From: Teodor Sigaev User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.8.1.15) Gecko/20080715 SeaMonkey/1.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tom Lane CC: Oleg Bartunov , Pgsql Hackers Subject: Re: [PATCHES] GIN improvements References: <483FD205.4090904@sigaev.ru> <486BC501.6060605@sigaev.ru> <27880.1215810535@sss.pgh.pa.us> <487A6E0C.3090600@sigaev.ru> <29437.1216742605@sss.pgh.pa.us> <48861758.4070507@sigaev.ru> <1636.1216749010@sss.pgh.pa.us> <488625E8.4070203@sigaev.ru> <2818.1216753264@sss.pgh.pa.us> In-Reply-To: <2818.1216753264@sss.pgh.pa.us> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=KOI8-R; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=none X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200807/1060 X-Sequence-Number: 121320 > once, for regular VACUUM I think you really have to call it within > each bulkdelete operation. Exactly what I did in last patch. > There's probably no point in optimizing > it away in VACUUM FULL either, since surely it'll be fast to call > index_cleanup when there's nothing in the pending list? Sure, with empty pending list insertcleanup will just lock/unlock metapage. > Yeah, I was going to complain about that next :-). Autovacuum isn't > going to trigger as a result of INSERT operations; somehow we have > to teach it what to do for GIN indexes. I remember we discussed this > at PGCon but I don't think we decided exactly what to do... So, may be we just move insertcleanup call to ginbulkdelete/ginvacuumcleanup but leave aminsertcleanup field in pg_proc for a future. > I've already made a number of changes to the patch; let me keep working > on it and send it back to you later. ok -- Teodor Sigaev E-mail: teodor@sigaev.ru WWW: http://www.sigaev.ru/