Received: from maia.hub.org (unknown [200.46.208.211]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADB7A6335BA for ; Thu, 1 Apr 2010 17:43:05 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.211]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 25409-06 for ; Thu, 1 Apr 2010 20:42:50 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9322633117 for ; Thu, 1 Apr 2010 17:42:54 -0300 (ADT) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id o31KgrAs022502; Thu, 1 Apr 2010 16:42:53 -0400 (EDT) To: Scott Carey cc: Robert Haas , Andy Colson , Gnanakumar , "pgsql-performance@postgresql.org" Subject: Re: Database size growing over time and leads to performance impact In-reply-to: <0E67806D-BED3-4998-83C7-842BEC6447AF@richrelevance.com> References: <004701cacdad$7013e9f0$503bbdd0$@com> <4BAE09AE.9020305@squeakycode.net> <0E67806D-BED3-4998-83C7-842BEC6447AF@richrelevance.com> Comments: In-reply-to Scott Carey message dated "Thu, 01 Apr 2010 13:08:46 -0700" Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2010 16:42:53 -0400 Message-ID: <22501.1270154573@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.464 tagged_above=-10 required=5 tests=AWL=0.135, BAYES_00=-2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 201004/16 X-Sequence-Number: 38266 Scott Carey writes: > Still off topic: > Will CLUSTER/VF respect FILLFACTOR in 9.0? > As far as I can tell in 8.4, it does not. Works for me, in both branches. regards, tom lane