Re: GIN improvements part 1: additional information - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tomas Vondra
Subject Re: GIN improvements part 1: additional information
Date
Msg-id 525975BD.3080403@fuzzy.cz
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: GIN improvements part 1: additional information  (Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 12.10.2013 12:11, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 1:55 AM, Tomas Vondra <tv@fuzzy.cz
> <mailto:tv@fuzzy.cz>> wrote:
> 
>     Yup, this version fixed the issues. I haven't been able to do any
>     benchmarks yet, all I have is some basic stats
> 
>                    |   HEAD   |  patched
>     ======================================
>     load duration  |  1084 s  |   1086 s
>     subject index  |   96 MB  |     96 MB
>     body index     | 2349 MB  |   2051 MB
> 
>     So there's virtually no difference in speed (which is expected, AFAIK)
>     and the large index on full message bodies is significantly smaller.
> 
> 
> Yes, it should be no significant difference in speed. But difference in
> index sizes seems to be too small. Could you share database dump somewhere?

Turns out that if I do VACUUM FULL after loading the data (a sequence of
INSERT commands), the index sizes drop significantly.
                  |   HEAD   |  patched   ======================================   subject index  |   42 MB  |    15 MB
 body index     |  624 MB  |   328 MB
 

So there's a significant improvement, as expected. I'm wondering if the
bloat is expected too? Is that the consequence of incremental index
updates vs. rebuilding the whole index at once during VACUUM FULL?

Tomas



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Amit Kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: Compression of full-page-writes
Next
From: Kohei KaiGai
Date:
Subject: Re: background workers, round three