Hello. At Wed, 3 Apr 2019 11:55:00 -0400, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote in <ca+tgmoas581jpj0tpaa38ohjxhgbly8z1fuuhh7cankrboz...@mail.gmail.com> > On Wed, Apr 3, 2019 at 1:32 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.m...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Attached the updated version patches including the > > DISABLE_PAGE_SKIPPING part (0003). > > I am confused about nleft_dead_tuples. It looks like it gets > incremented whenever we set tupgone = true, regardless of whether we > are doing index cleanup. But if we ARE doing index cleanup then the > dead tuple will not be left. And if we are not doing index vacuum > then we still don't need this for anything, because tups_vacuumed is > counting the same thing. I may be confused. But if I'm not, then I > think this should just be ripped out, and we should only keep > nleft_dead_itemids.
tups_vacuumed is including heap_page_prune()ed tuples, which aren't counted as "tupgone". > As far as VacOptTernaryValue, I think it would be safer to change this > so that VACOPT_TERNARY_DEFAULT = 0. That way palloc0 will fill in the > value that people are likely to want by default, which makes it less > likely that people will accidentally write future code that doesn't > clean up indexes. It's convincing. My compalint was enabled=0 and disabled=1 is confusing so I'm fine with default=0, disabled=1, enabled=2. regards. -- Kyotaro Horiguchi NTT Open Source Software Center
