Heikki Linnakangas escribió: > Every time you do an index lookup, you have to follow that chain from 1 > to 5. Which gets expensive. That's why we want to prune the chain to > make it shorter, even if there's still plenty of room on the page for > updates, and even if we're never going to update it again. > > That's the theory. I don't know *how* expensive following the chain > really is, compared to index scans skipping over entries marked as > killed. I don't remember seeing any measurements of that.
I suggest you let that be. Chain following can't be *that* expensive -- and if it is, then pruning would be a lot more expensive, so it's not a thing you want to be doing for every heap_fetch. Pruning is going to take place on next vacuum anyway, isn't it? AFAIUI the point is that you can't do cleanup selectively only on UPDATE because of pointers that your process may already have to the page, which is why you wanted to do it on every heap_fetch. I suggest it is optimization which can be left for a later version (8.4?) -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/ PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
