From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Wes <wespvp(at)syntegra(dot)com> |
Cc: | Postgresql-General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Vacuum time degrading |
Date: | 2005-03-02 21:51:21 |
Message-ID: | 14167.1109800281@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
Wes <wespvp(at)syntegra(dot)com> writes:
> Watching the system as vacuum is running, I can see that we are encountering
> the kswapd/kscand problem in the 2.4.20 kernel. This could very well
> account for the non-linear increase in vacuum time.
Hmm. Looking at the vacuum verbose output you sent me, it's clear that
the bulk of the time is going into scanning a couple of the larger
indexes. On an index that's been growing for awhile, this involves a
highly nonsequential access pattern (it wants to visit the index leaf
pages in sort order, which will not look much like physical order after
a lot of page splits have occurred). I don't know whether that would
tend to set off the kswapd/kscand problems, but just in terms of
physical I/O time it might be annoying. I was going to suggest
REINDEXing those indexes to see if that cuts the vacuum time at all.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2005-03-02 21:59:22 | Re: Index size |
Previous Message | Wes | 2005-03-02 21:31:12 | Re: Vacuum time degrading |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Mark Wong | 2005-03-02 22:15:37 | Re: 8.0.X and the ARC patent |
Previous Message | pgsql | 2005-03-02 21:38:28 | Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] snprintf causes regression |