RE: Vacuum only with 20% old tuples - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Hiroshi Inoue
Subject RE: Vacuum only with 20% old tuples
Date
Msg-id 002401bfebae$afda0100$2801007e@tpf.co.jp
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Vacuum only with 20% old tuples  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Vacuum only with 20% old tuples  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pgsql-hackers-owner@hub.org [mailto:pgsql-hackers-owner@hub.org]On
> Behalf Of Tom Lane
>
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > I suggest that we change vacuum to only move remove tuples if there is
> > more than 20% expired tuples.
>
> > When we do vacuum, we drop all indexes and recreate them.
>
> > This fixes the complaint about vacuum slowness when there are many
> > expired rows in the table.  We know this is causes by excessive index
> > updates.  It allows indexes to shrink (Jan pointed this out to me.)  And
> > it fixes the TOAST problem with TOAST values in indexes.
>
> We can't "drop and recreate" without a solution to the relation
> versioning issue (unless you are prepared to accept a nonfunctional
> database after a failure partway through index rebuild on a system
> table).  I think we should do this, but it's not all that simple...
>

Is this topic independent of WAL in the first place ?

Regards.

Hiroshi Inoue



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Re: postgres TODO
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Vacuum only with 20% old tuples