Re: database bloat, but vacuums are done, and fsm seems - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Simon Riggs
Subject Re: database bloat, but vacuums are done, and fsm seems
Date
Msg-id 1128376022.8603.137.camel@localhost.localdomain
Whole thread Raw
In response to database bloat, but vacuums are done, and fsm seems to be setup ok  (hubert depesz lubaczewski <depesz@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-performance
On Wed, 2005-09-28 at 09:07 +0200, hubert depesz lubaczewski wrote:
> database has quite huge load of updates, but i thought that vacum will
> guard me from database bloat, but from what i observed it means that
> vacuuming of b-tree indices is somewhat faulty.

No, thats perfectly normal.

Indices are packed tighter when they are first created and they spread
out a bit as you update the database. Blocks start at 90% full and end
up at 50% full for non-monotonic indexes (e.g. SERIAL) or 67% for
monotonic.

It's a long debated design feature on any DBMS that uses b-trees.

REINDEX or dump/restore should be identical.

Best Regards, Simon Riggs


pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: "Jeffrey W. Baker"
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] A Better External Sort?
Next
From: Josh Berkus
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] A Better External Sort?