| From: | Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA(at)wien(dot)spardat(dot)at> |
|---|---|
| To: | "'Tom Lane'" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA(at)wien(dot)spardat(dot)at> |
| Cc: | Vadim Mikheev <vmikheev(at)sectorbase(dot)com>, "'Bruce Momjian'" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | AW: AW: Plans for solving the VACUUM problem |
| Date: | 2001-05-21 16:22:47 |
| Message-ID: | 11C1E6749A55D411A9670001FA6879633682E3@sdexcsrv1.f000.d0188.sd.spardat.at |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> > Tom: If your ratio of physical pages vs WAL records is so bad, the config
> > should simply be changes to do fewer checkpoints (say every 20 min like a
> > typical Informix setup).
>
> I was using the default configuration. What caused the problem was
> probably not so much the standard 5-minute time-interval-driven
I am quite sure, that I would increase the default to at least 15 min here.
> checkpoints, as it was the standard every-3-WAL-segments checkpoints.
> Possibly we ought to increase that number?
Here I am unfortunately not so sure with the current logic (that you can only free
them after the checkpoint). I think the admin has to choose this. Maybe increase to 4,
but 64 Mb is quite a lot for a small installation :-(
Andreas
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Rawnsley | 2001-05-21 16:26:11 | Re: Queries across multiple databases (was: SELECT from a table in another database). |
| Previous Message | Zeugswetter Andreas SB | 2001-05-21 16:11:16 | AW: Plans for solving the VACUUM problem |