From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Matthew <matthew@flymine.org>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Heavy write activity on first vacuum of fresh TOASTa
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 11:22:49 -0500
Message-ID: <8116.1197649369@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0712141538490.3731@aragorn.flymine.org>
References: <4760FF69.EE98.0025.0@wicourts.gov>
<1197562283.4255.1829.camel@ebony.site>
<Pine.LNX.4.58.0712141538490.3731@aragorn.flymine.org>
Matthew <matthew@flymine.org> writes:
> Interesting thread. Now, I know absolutely nothing about how the data is
> stored, but it strikes me as being non-optimal that every single block on
> the disc needs to be written again just to update some hint bits. Could
> those bits be taken out into a separate bitmap stored somewhere else?
You are trying to optimize the wrong thing. Making vacuum cheaper at
the cost of making every tuple lookup more expensive is not going to
be a win.
regards, tom lane
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, matthew@flymine.org
Subject: Re: Heavy write activity on first vacuum of fresh TOASTa
In-Reply-To: <8116.1197649369@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox