Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Denis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
There were 1905028 unused item pointers.
The unused item pointers number seems a bit high, but otherwise that
looks pretty reasonable.
Is it possible that the particular row you were updating has been
updated quite a lot of
Martin Lesser [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What causes this unused item pointers and which impact do they have
regarding performance?
Those are item pointer slots that were once used but aren't used at the
moment. VACUUM leaves an empty slot behind when it removes a dead
tuple, and the slot is
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Martin Lesser [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What causes this unused item pointers and which impact do they have
regarding performance?
The direct performance impact is really pretty minimal (and none at
all on indexscans, AFAIR). The reason Denis' number drew
