| From: | Alan Stange <stange(at)rentec(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Vivek Khera <vivek(at)khera(dot)org>, Postgresql Performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: postgresql performance tuning |
| Date: | 2005-12-06 21:39:59 |
| Message-ID: | 4396052F.9050507@rentec.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Alan Stange <stange(at)rentec(dot)com> writes:
>
>> Vivek Khera wrote:
>>
>>> what evidence do you have that you are suffering index bloat?
>>>
>
>
>> The files for the two indices on a single table used 7.8GB of space
>> before a reindex, and 4.4GB after.
>>
>
> That's not bloat ... that's pretty nearly in line with the normal
> expectation for a btree index, which is about 2/3rds fill factor.
> If the compacted index were 10X smaller then I'd agree that you have
> a bloat problem.
>
I wrote "I don't think this counts as bloat...". I still don't.
-- Alan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ron Mayer | 2005-12-06 21:42:09 | Re: Missed index opportunity for outer join? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-12-06 21:36:53 | Re: Context switching and Xeon processors |