AW: Why vacuum? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Zeugswetter Andreas SB
Subject AW: Why vacuum?
Date
Msg-id 11C1E6749A55D411A9670001FA687963368182@sdexcsrv1.f000.d0188.sd.spardat.at
Whole thread Raw
List pgsql-hackers
> > > The tendency here seems to be towards an improved smgr.
> > > But, it is currently extremely cheap to calculate where a new row
> > > needs to be located physically. This task is *a lot* more expensive
> > > in an overwrite smgr.
> 
> I don't agree. If (as I have proposed) the search is made in the
> background by a low priority process, you just have to lookup a cache
> entry to find out where to write.

If the priority is too low you will end up with the same behavior as current,
because the cache will be emptied by high priority multiple new rows,
thus writing to the end anyways. Conclusio: In those cases where overwrite would
be most advantageous (high volume modified table) your system won't work,
unless you resort to my concern and make it *very* expensive (=high priority).

Andreas


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Alfred Perlstein
Date:
Subject: Re: Why vacuum?
Next
From: "Vadim Mikheev"
Date:
Subject: Re: vacuum verbose analyze lazy problem.