Re: A couple thoughts about btree fillfactor

From: Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)skype(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: A couple thoughts about btree fillfactor
Date: 2006-07-10 17:31:17
Message-ID: 1152552677.4006.6.camel@localhost.localdomain
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Ühel kenal päeval, E, 2006-07-10 kell 12:36, kirjutas Tom Lane:

> 3. What should the minimum fillfactor be? The patch as submitted
> set the minimum to 50% for all relation types. I'm inclined to
> think we should allow much lower fillfactors, maybe down to 10%.
> A really low fillfactor could be a good idea in a heavily updated
> table --- at least, I don't think we have any evidence to prove
> that it's not sane to want a fillfactor below 50%.

Sure 50% is way too big as an lower limit. We may even want to have
pages that have only 1 tuple in heavy update cases.

So perhaps we should set the minimum to 1% or even 0.1% and apply
similar logic you suggested for btree pages above, that is stop adding
new ones when the threasold is reached.

> Comments?

--
----------------
Hannu Krosing
Database Architect
Skype Technologies OÜ
Akadeemia tee 21 F, Tallinn, 12618, Estonia

Skype me: callto:hkrosing
Get Skype for free: http://www.skype.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Florian G. Pflug 2006-07-10 17:34:48 Warm-Standby using WAL archiving / Seperate pg_restorelog application
Previous Message mark 2006-07-10 17:09:26 Re: A couple thoughts about btree fillfactor