On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 2:10 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > Claudio Freire wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 1:46 PM, Alvaro Herrera >> <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >> > Claudio Freire wrote: >> > >> >> > The vacuuming the very large table with no index could also take a >> >> > long time, and it scans and vacuums blocks one by one. So I imagined >> >> > that we can vacuum the FSM once vacuumed a certain amount of blocks. >> >> > And that can avoid bloating table during the long-time vacuum. >> >> >> >> Could do that. I'll see about doing something of the sort and >> >> submitting it as a separate patch. >> > >> > Vacuuming of the FSM is in no way strictly tied to vacuuming the heap >> > (it's not really "vacuuming", it's just about updating the upper layers >> > to match the data in the leaves). I think we could use the new autovac >> > "workitem" infrastructure and tack an item there once in a while for FSM >> > vacuuming ... >> >> Well, it *is* tied in the sense that vacuum is the one massively >> adding free space. > > Yes, but if vacuum dies after releasing lots of space but before > vacuuming FSM, then it's not tied anymore and you could just as well run > it anytime.
I see your point. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
