Re: hot updates and fillfactor - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Fabrice Chapuis
Subject Re: hot updates and fillfactor
Date
Msg-id CAA5-nLCX8KV1tOL0BW9MkPrMtfV5jnfjJwysf4o=QVxPDgLFbg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: hot updates and fillfactor  (Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander@timescale.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Thanks for your explanation and for the links


On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 11:17 AM Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander@timescale.com> wrote:
Hi Fabrice,

> I do not understand why hot_updates value is not 0 for pg_database? Given that reloptions is empty for this table that means it has a default value of 100%

Maybe I didn't entirely understand your question, but why would you
assume they are somehow related?

According to the documentation [1][2]:

pg_class.reloptions:
  Access-method-specific options, as “keyword=value” strings

pg_stat_all_tables.n_tup_hot_upd:
  Number of rows HOT updated. These are updates where no successor
versions are required in indexes.

The value of n_tup_hot_upd is not zero because there are tuples that
were HOT-updated. That's it. You can read more about HOT here [3].

[1]: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/catalog-pg-class.html
[2]: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/monitoring-stats.html
[3]: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/storage-hot.html

--
Best regards,
Aleksander Alekseev

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Aleksander Alekseev
Date:
Subject: Re: MIN/MAX functions for a record
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: MIN/MAX functions for a record