Re: Subject: bool / vacuum full bug followup part 2

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: Subject: bool / vacuum full bug followup part 2
Дата
Msg-id 15296.1020455274@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на bool / vacuum full bug followup part 2  (Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@ihs.com>)
Ответы Re: Subject: bool / vacuum full bug followup part 2  (Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@ihs.com>)
Re: Subject: bool / vacuum full bug followup part 2  (Jeffrey Baker <jwbaker@acm.org>)
Re: Subject: bool / vacuum full bug followup part 2  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
Список pgsql-general
Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@ihs.com> writes:
> And reclaimed the space.  Is that the official way, short of dropping and
> recreating an index to reclaim its space?  Is there a plan to make vacuum
> reclaim unused space in indexes?

Yes, and yes, but don't hold your breath on the latter part --- that
TODO item has been around for awhile.  And it's gotten harder now that
we have lazy VACUUM; that means we need to be able to condense indexes
concurrently with other index operations.

AFAIK there's not a big problem with index growth if the range of index
keys remains reasonably static.  The problem comes in if you have a
range of values that keeps growing (eg, you are indexing a SERIAL or
timestamp column).  The right end of the btree keeps growing, but
there's no mechanism to collapse out no-longer-used space at the left
end.

            regards, tom lane

В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Uros Gruber
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: problem with RULEs
Следующее
От: Paul M Foster
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Foxpro