On 10.08.2011 22:44, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
> Manual and readme updates.
Thanks, I'm reviewing these now.
Do we want to expose the level-step and buffersize parameters to users?
They've been useful during testing, but I'm thinking we should be able
to guess good enough values for them automatically, and just remove the
options. It's pretty much impossible for a user to tune them correctly,
it would require deep knowledge of the buffering algorithm.
I'm thinking that even when you explicitly turn buffering on, we should
still process the first 10000 or so tuples with simple inserts. That way
we always have a sample of tuples to calculate the average tuple size
from. It's plausible that if the input data is ordered, looking at the
first N tuples will give skewed sample, but I don't think there's much
danger of that in practice. Even if the data is ordered, the length of
GiST tuples shouldn't vary much.
What happens if we get the levelstep and pagesPerBuffer estimates wrong?
How sensitive is the algorithm to that? Or will we run out of memory?
Would it be feasible to adjust those in the middle of the index build,
if we e.g exceed the estimated memory usage greatly?
-- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
