On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 08:53:54PM -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 7:18 PM Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 04:14:56PM -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> > > On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 3:58 PM Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote:
> > > > OK, you are confirming what Matthias suggested. I added these two
> > > > items, which both seem to apply only to heap pages, not index pages:
> > >
> > > That's right -- these two relate to heap pages only.
> > >
> > > I think that Matthias compared these two to bottom-up index deletion
> > > because all three patches are concerned about avoiding "a permanent
> > > solution to a temporary problem". They're conceptually similar despite
> > > being in fairly different areas. Evidently Matthias has a similar
> > > mental model to my own when it comes to this stuff.
> >
> > Agreed, that is a very interesting distinction.
>
> BTW, I think that the wording of the bottom-up index deletion item
> should be changed to describe the result rather than the mechanism
> itself. The important idea is that non-HOT updaters are made to clean
> up their own mess before it gets out of hand (i.e. before a
> version-driven page split can go ahead), at least for those indexes
> whose columns are not logically modified by the UPDATE statement
> (usually most indexes on the table). We're making the updaters live
> within their means -- they cannot be allowed to avoid paying small
> incremental costs if that ultimately imposes a much larger, lasting
> cost on the system as a whole. This could be thought of as a negative
> externality.
>
> The index deletion mechanism itself is not that different to what we
> had before. The important point is how and when it kicks in, and the
> systematic effect of that over time. It's a subtractive thing, not an
> additive thing -- it's helpful because of what *doesn't* happen in
> Postgres 14.
I updated this to:
<listitem>
<!--
Author: Peter Geoghegan <p...@bowt.ie>
2021-01-13 [9dc718bdf] Pass down "logically unchanged index" hint.
Author: Peter Geoghegan <p...@bowt.ie>
2021-01-13 [d168b6668] Enhance nbtree index tuple deletion.
-->
<para>
Allow index additions to remove expired btree index entries to prevent
page
splits (Peter Geoghegan)
</para>
<para>
This is particularly helpful for reducing index bloat on tables whose
indexed columns are frequently updated.
</para>
</listitem>
--
Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com
If only the physical world exists, free will is an illusion.
