On Thu, Apr 9, 2020 at 1:37 PM James Coleman <jtc331@gmail.com> wrote:
> We saw the issue on our PG11 clusters. The specific index we noticed
> in the wal dump (I don't think we confirmed if there were others) as
> one on a `created_at` column, to give you an idea of cardinality.
You tend to get a lot of problems with indexes like that when there
are consistent updates (actually, that's more of a thing with an
updated_at index). But non-HOT updates alone might result in what you
could describe as "updates" to the index.
With Postgres 11, a low cardinality index could place new/successor
duplicate index tuples (those needed for non-HOT updates) on a more or
less random leaf page (you'll recall that this is determined by the
old "getting tired" logic). This is the kind of thing I had in mind
when I asked Sawada-san about it.
Was this a low cardinality index in the way I describe? If it was,
then we can hope (and maybe even verify) that the Postgres 12 work
noticeably ameliorates the problem.
--
Peter Geoghegan
