Re: more about pg_toast growth

Jeffrey W. Baker wrote:
> On Tue, 2002-04-09 at 11:52, Jan Wieck wrote:
> > I still believe it's due to the massive amount of data pumped
> > through that table between vacuums and inappropriate settings
> > for the freespace map size for this particular case.
> >
> > Initially I suggested an FSM size of 50,000 "to start with".
> > That was meant as an introduction to play around with these
> > parameters a little, figuring out what the right settings are
> > in his case, and reporting back the result. What we got back
> > after a week or longer, was a lax "still doesn't work". It
> > seemed to me he had not spent alot of time to understand the
> > underlying concepts, nor has he ever taken a single look at
> > the code.
>
> I don't need this abuse. I'm perfectly capable of reading the source
> code for PostgreSQL. I helped diagnose a spinlock contention problem in
> the 7.2beta series and I maintain DBD::Pg. And I've contributed source
> code to several other projects which I need not list here.

Abuse of what?

I did not mean to offend you in any way. Maybe I wasn't
carefull enough in choosing my words, maybe you missed the
smiley in my earlier posting (that about doing a little
math), maybe whatever.

Anyway, seems we don't get along well enough to work
together. Thus, it's better you help someone else to
diagnose your problem. Good luck.

Jan

--

#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#================================================== JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com #