Re: Subject: bool / vacuum full bug followup part 2
От | Jeffrey Baker |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Subject: bool / vacuum full bug followup part 2 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20020504221757.GD370@noodles обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Subject: bool / vacuum full bug followup part 2 (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
On Sat, May 04, 2002 at 06:06:38PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Jeffrey Baker <jwbaker@acm.org> writes: > > On Fri, May 03, 2002 at 03:47:54PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > >> 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. > > > Wouldn't that explain the complaints I have about my toast tables > > always growing? > > It'd explain the indexes growing --- the index key is an OID, which will > keep increasing as you store new toasted values. I thought you'd been > complaining about the tables themselves, though. You're right, I am. But in my quest to operate Pg properly I am trying to nail down everything that causes its disk usage to increase. I just had a look at my prod. database and the toast tables are much larger than their indices, so it is probably irrelevant. -jwb
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: