On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 12:17:47PM -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 12:04 PM, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: > > I don't think the table being 'append-only' is necessary? Nor does it > > have to be a manual vacuum. And 'needless index scan' sounds less than > > it is/was, namely a full scan of the index. Perhaps something like: > > > > Allow vacuum to skip doing a full scan of btree indexes after VACUUM, > > if not necessary. > > > > or something like that? > > I suggest "Allow vacuuming to avoid full index scans for indexes when > there are no dead tuples found in a table. Where necessary, the > behavior can be adjusted via the new configuration parameter > vacuum_cleanup_index_scale_factor." > > Also: > > * "Allow indexes to be built in parallel" should specify that it only > works for B-Tree index builds. > > * Suggest replacement sort item be phrased as: "Remove the > configuration parameter replacement_sort_tuples. <newline> The > replacement selection sort algorithm is no longer used."
All done. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. + + Ancient Roman grave inscription +
