>>>>>> >>>>>> +1. If we consider some more names for that column then probably one >>>>>> alternative could be "empty pages". >>>>> >>>>> Yeah, but I think "unused" might be better. Because a page could be >>>>> in use (as an overflow page or primary bucket page) and still be >>>>> empty. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Based on the earlier discussions, I have prepared a patch that would >>>> allow pgstathashindex() to show the number of unused pages in hash >>>> index. Please find the attached patch for the same. Thanks. >>>> >>> >>> else if (opaque->hasho_flag & LH_BITMAP_PAGE) >>> stats.bitmap_pages++; >>> + else if (PageIsEmpty(page)) >>> + stats.unused_pages++; >>> >>> I think having this check after PageIsNew() makes more sense then >>> having at the place where you currently have, >> >> I don't think having it just below PageIsNew() check would be good. >> The reason being, there can be a bucket page which is in use but still >> be empty. So, if we add a check just below PageIsNew check then even >> though a page is marked as bucket page and is empty it will be shown >> as unused page which i feel is not correct. Here is one simple example >> that illustrates this point, >> > > oh, is it a page where all the items have been deleted and no new > items have been inserted?
Yes, it is a page from where items have been removed and no new insertion has happened. The reason why I have told that place is > not appropriate is because all the other checks in near by code are on > the page type and this check looks odd at that place, but we might > need to do this way if there is no other clean solution. I got your point but then i think that is the only one solution we have as of now. -- With Regards, Ashutosh Sharma EnterpriseDB:http://www.enterprisedb.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers