On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 8:49 PM, Peter Geoghegan <peter.geoghegan86@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 2 February 2011 05:41, Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>> I wouldn't increase index fill factor as an optimisation, unless you >>> had the unusual situation of having very static data in the table. >> >> That makes no sense whatsoever. You decrease fill factor (not >> increase btw) so there will be some space for future updates. If he's >> getting bloat it may well help quite a bit to have a lower than 100% >> fill factor. > > As I said, it depends on the profile of the data. Heavily or randomly > updated tables will benefit from reducing *index* fillfactor - it will > reduce index fragmentation. OTOH, indexes for static data can have > their fillfactors increased to 100% from the default of 90% without > consequence. > Certainly. I was talking table fill factor at the time, so that's why I wasn't sure what you meant. -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
