Re: Fillfactor for GIN indexes - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alexander Korotkov
Subject Re: Fillfactor for GIN indexes
Date
Msg-id CAPpHfdtWVc0sSwFugo4+tTDwqN=-bN2LxgS=-hnw_mr4LYPcsQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Fillfactor for GIN indexes  (Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: Fillfactor for GIN indexes
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 5:15 PM, Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
I hoped lowering the fillfactor will improve this, but fillfactor=75 had
pretty much no effect in this case. Is that expected for this kind of
workload? I see the previous discussion talked about random updates, not
inserts, so maybe that's the culprit?

Yes. Since posting trees are ordered by item pointers, you can get benefit of fillfactor only if you use some item pointers lower than item pointers already in use. You can still get benefit in the insert case but you should have already some free space in the heap (perhaps do some deletes and vacuum).

Actually, this is narrowing benefit from GIN fillfactor. Probably, that means that we should still have default value of 100. But I think GIN fillfactor still might be useful.

------
With best regards,
Alexander Korotkov.

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Amit Langote
Date:
Subject: Re: Partitioning WIP patch (was: Partitioning: issues/ideas)
Next
From: Fabien COELHO
Date:
Subject: event triggers with args?