Re: Vacuum full: alternatives?

From: Chris Ernst <cernst(at)zvelo(dot)com>
To: Job <Job(at)colliniconsulting(dot)it>, "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Vacuum full: alternatives?
Date: 2016-06-20 15:46:07
Message-ID: 08321341-c7cf-e6f8-a7e8-ac31d600118c@zvelo.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On 06/20/2016 03:18 AM, Job wrote:
> Hello,
>
> we have a table with an heavy traffic of pg_bulkload and delete of records.
> The size pass, in only one day, for example for 1Gb to 4Gb and then 1Gb back.
>
> We have important problems on size and the only way to gain free space is issueing a vacuum full <table>.
> But the operation is very slow, sometimes 2/4 hours, and table is not available for services as it is locked.
>
> We do not delete everything at one (in this case the truncate woudl resolve the problem).
>
> The autovacuum is not able (same for normal vacuum) to free the spaces.
>
> Are there some suggestions or another way to manage this?

Hi Francesco,

We use pg_repack (http://reorg.github.io/pg_repack/) for a similar
workload. It allows what amounts to an online vacuum full. The only
caveat is that you need to have the available disk space to fully
rebuild the table in parallel.

Hope that helps.

Cheers!

- Chris

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jeff Janes 2016-06-20 15:51:41 Re: R: Vacuum full: alternatives?
Previous Message John R Pierce 2016-06-20 15:45:33 Re: R: Vacuum full: alternatives?