From: | "Jay O'Connor" <joconnor(at)cybermesa(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Bruno Wolff III <bruno(at)wolff(dot)to> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL List <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: perfromance impact of vacuum |
Date: | 2003-07-15 18:04:53 |
Message-ID: | 20030715110453.Q28847@altaica |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 2003.07.15 09:53 Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2003 at 10:37:28 -0700,
> Jay O'Connor <joconnor(at)cybermesa(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > Just curious but is the length of time to vacuum influenced more by the
> > size of the table or the number of dead tuples?
>
> I think the fraction of the table that is dead tuples is probably the
> best
> thing to look at for deciding when to vacuum (unless the tables are very
> small in which case checking for the number of blocks used may be
> better).
>
Actually what I meant is how long the vacuum runs. We're going to have a
big database (few TB projected, but I don't know where those numbers come
from) and I'm trying to ausage concerns that vacuuming will impact
performance significantly.
Thanks
Jay
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Frank Finner | 2003-07-15 18:06:17 | Re: Are you frustrated with PostgreSQL |
Previous Message | Dmitry Tkach | 2003-07-15 17:52:51 | Re: [GENERAL] INSTEAD rule bug? |