It's been a while, but here are a few more suggested removals/edits/additions to the TODO list. Any objections or new information, let me know:
- Auto-fill the free space map by scanning the buffer cache or by checking pages written by the background writer http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-02/msg01125.php https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/200603011716.16984.pete...@gmx.net Both these threads are from 2006, so have nothing to do with the current FSM. - Allow concurrent inserts to use recently created pages rather than creating new ones http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2010-05/msg00853.php Skimming the first few messages, I believe this has been covered by commit 719c84c1b? (Extend relations multiple blocks at a time to improve scalability.) - Allow VACUUM FULL and CLUSTER to update the visibility map This topic has a current CF entry which seems to have stalled, so that newer thread would be better to list here than the one from 2013. - Bias FSM towards returning free space near the beginning of the heap file, in hopes that empty pages at the end can be truncated by VACUUM http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-09/msg01124.php https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20150424190403.gp4...@alvh.no-ip.org I'm not sure what to think of this, but independently of that, the second thread is actually talking about bringing back something like the pre-9.0 vacuum full, so maybe it should be its own entry? - Consider a more compact data representation for dead tuple locations within VACUUM http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2007-05/msg00143.php Great, but let's link to this more recent thread instead: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CAD21AoAfOZvmfR0j8VmZorZjL7RhTiQdVttNuC4W-Shdc2a-AA%40mail.gmail.com - Improve autovacuum tuning http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/5078ad6b.8060...@agliodbs.com http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20130124215715.ge4...@alvh.no-ip.org I'm kind of on the fence about these. The title is way too broad, and I doubt we are going to forget to keep improving this area. It seems the first thread is really about auto-analyze thresholds, so maybe it should be in a separate entry if we want to do anything mentioned in the thread? The second thread is really about autovacuum launcher scheduling. Probably still relevant, but the thread is very long and doesn't seem terribly helpful to someone trying to get up to speed on the issues that are still relevant. I don't see any more recent discussion, either. Thoughts? -- John Naylor EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
