On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 10:09 AM, Alvaro Herrera <[email protected]> wrote: > Excerpts from Joshua D. Drake's message of dom mar 13 23:20:01 -0300 2011: >> On Sun, 2011-03-13 at 19:40 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> >> > I'm not planning to do anything about this idea right now, since I'm >> > still hip-deep in collations, but I thought I'd throw it out to get >> > it on the record. >> > >> > Comments? >> >> One question: Where is the overhead increase? > > During VACUUM, in the pass that processes indexes. > > I think Tom is sligthly confused though: AFAICT this must happen in > btvacuumscan (which does the actual scan), not btvacuumcleanup (which > may not do it, if btbulkdelete did it previously). Which means it would > be done for each pass over the index when vacuuming a relation, because > I don't see any way for this function to determine whether this is the > last pass we'll do over the index. > > It sure would be nice to be able to do it only during the last scan.
Does it really matter? What Tom was describing sounded embarassingly cheap. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([email protected]) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
