On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 3:24 PM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2008-07-11 at 14:51 -0600, Scott Marlowe wrote:
>
>> I would kindly disagree. I'm looking at a project where HOT updates
>> are going to be a real performance enhancement, but I'll have to
>> create a hundred or so tables ALL with fillfactor tacked on the end.
>
> You clearly think that adjusting fillfactor helps in all cases with HOT.
> I disagree with that, else would have pushed earlier for exactly what
> you suggest. In fact, I've has this exact discussion previously.
How odd, because that's clearly NOT what I said. In fact I used the
single "a" to describe the project I was looking at where having a
default table fill factor of < 100 would be very useful. OTOH, I have
stats databases that have only insert and drop child tables that would
not benefit from < 100 fill factor. For a heavily updated database,
where most of the updates will NOT be on indexed columns, as the ONE
project I'm looking at, a default fill factor would be quite a time
saver.
