On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 10:19 AM, Michael Paquier <michael.paqu...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 2:03 PM, Michael Paquier > <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 6:31 AM, Alexander Korotkov <aekorot...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 4:11 PM, Michael Paquier < > michael.paqu...@gmail.com> > >>> I am attaching an updated patch, with the default fillfactor value at > >>> 75%, and with the page split code using the fillfactor rate. > >>> Thoughts? > >> Rewritten version of patch is attached. I made following changes: > > > > Thanks! With this patch (and my previous version as well) GIN indexes > > with default fillfactor have a size higher than 9.4 indexes, 9.4 > > behavior being consistent only with fillfactor=100 and not the default > > of 90. Are we fine with that? > IMO, this patch has value to control random updates on GIN indexes, > but we should have a default fillfactor of 100 to have index size > consistent with 9.4. Thoughts? > I'm not sure. On the one hand it's unclear why fillfactor should be different from 9.4. On the other hand it's unclear why it should be different from btree. I propose marking this "ready for committer". So, committer can make a final decision. ------ With best regards, Alexander Korotkov.
