On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 12:17:47PM -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 12:04 PM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> > I don't think the table being 'append-only' is necessary? Nor does it
> > have to be a manual vacuum. And 'needless index scan' sounds less than
> > it is/was, namely a full scan of the index. Perhaps something like:
> >
> > Allow vacuum to skip doing a full scan of btree indexes after VACUUM,
> > if not necessary.
> >
> > or something like that?
>
> I suggest "Allow vacuuming to avoid full index scans for indexes when
> there are no dead tuples found in a table. Where necessary, the
> behavior can be adjusted via the new configuration parameter
> vacuum_cleanup_index_scale_factor."
>
> Also:
>
> * "Allow indexes to be built in parallel" should specify that it only
> works for B-Tree index builds.
>
> * Suggest replacement sort item be phrased as: "Remove the
> configuration parameter replacement_sort_tuples. <newline> The
> replacement selection sort algorithm is no longer used."
All done.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+ Ancient Roman grave inscription +
