Re: Why a bitmap scan in this case?
От | Frédéric Yhuel |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Why a bitmap scan in this case? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 8038b7ca-d4ba-40fb-824b-5f984fb80612@dalibo.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Why a bitmap scan in this case? (Frédéric Yhuel <frederic.yhuel@dalibo.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Why a bitmap scan in this case?
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
On 12/20/24 09:16, Frédéric Yhuel wrote: > > > On 12/19/24 20:09, Jon Zeppieri wrote: >> The table is freshly vacuumed. If I disable bitmap scans, it will do >> an index only scan, which performs better. For the bitmap heap scan, >> it says "Heap Blocks: exact=27393," whereas for the index only scan, >> it's "Heap Fetches: 27701." > > So you have 100% heap fetches. Are you sure that your table is freshly > vacuumed? Please note that VACUUM FULL doesn't create the visibility > map, so you still have to run a plain VACUUM for this. > > And if you still have heap fetches, you could try VACUUM (INDEX_CLEANUP TRUE), so that it doesn't bypass index vacuuming. (In case the pages that contain theses 27701 tuples amount to less than 2% of the total number of pages of the table). Nice explanation here: https://www.cybertec-postgresql.com/en/making-the-postgresql-visibility-map-visible/#vacuum-doesnt-update-the-visibility-map-as-it-should
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: