On Sun, Sep 1, 2024 at 5:44 PM Pavel Luzanov <p.luzanov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I see a perfectly working TID-store optimization. > With reduced maintenance_work_mem it used only one 'vacuuming indexes' > phase instead of 21 in v16. > But I also expected to see a reduction in the number of WAL records > and the total size of the WAL. Instead, WAL numbers have significantly > degraded. > > What am I doing wrong? That does seem weird. CC'ing the authors of the relevant VACUUM enhancements. -- Peter Geoghegan
