Decibel! wrote: > On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 11:32:52AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >>> Another option would be to prune whenever the free space goes >>> below table fillfactor and hope that users would set fillfactor so that >>> atleast one updated tuple can fit in the block. I know its not best to >>> rely on the users though. But it can be good hint. >> If default fillfactor weren't 100% then this might be good ;-). But > > Erik Jones and I were just talking about FILLFACTOR... > > Is the plan to keep it at 100% with HOT? ISTM that's not such a great > idea, since it forces at least the first update (if not many more) to be > COLD.
I think we should still keep it at 100%. Most tables are not updated, and a non-100% fillfactor will be waste of space when the extra space is not needed. Even a table that is updated should reach a steady state after a few cold updates. Those cold updates will make room on the pages for future updates, now that we can prune them and leave only dead line pointers behind. -- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
