On Sat, Jun 7, 2025 at 7:53 AM Laurenz Albe <laurenz.a...@cybertec.at> wrote:
> On Fri, 2025-06-06 at 09:59 -0400, Ron Johnson wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 6, 2025 at 8:57 AM Laurenz Albe <laurenz.a...@cybertec.at> > wrote: > > > On Fri, 2025-06-06 at 14:10 +0530, Durgamahesh Manne wrote: > > > > Can we generate a fill factor for tables that have delete ops ? > > > > > > > > Does the fill factor really work and help to minimize the bloat for > tables that have delete ops? > > > > > > > > I have parent table with weekly partitions So for every week 50 to > 60 gb of bloat generates and autovacuum params already in place for child > tables > > > > > > Nothing can ever avoid bloat caused by DELETE, except partitioning in a > > > way that you can drop a partition rather than running DELETE. > > > > Isn't the fill factor aimed at reducing bloat during updates of HOT > tables? > > Yes, but not during DELETEs. > I still don't understand why OP is deleting from a date-partitioned table, instead of dropping the oldest partitions. > HOT updates also don't directly avoid bloat on tables; only on indexes. > They reduce the bloat on tables inderectly, because the dead tuples can > be cleaned up with less effort. > Thanks for the clarification. -- Death to <Redacted>, and butter sauce. Don't boil me, I'm still alive. <Redacted> lobster!
