From: | Andrew Sullivan <andrew(at)libertyrms(dot)info> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Buglist |
Date: | 2003-08-20 20:51:54 |
Message-ID: | 20030820205154.GD7917@libertyrms.info |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Aug 20, 2003 at 12:40:03PM -0400, Vivek Khera wrote:
> >>>>> "BW" == Bruno Wolff, <Bruno> writes:
> BW> Also, since at least 7.3, normal vacuums aren't normally going to
> BW> affect the performance of your database server that much.
>
> I disagree. Triggering a vacuum on a db that is nearly saturating the
> disk bandwidth has a significant impact.
Vivek is right about this. If your system is already very busy, then
a vacuum on a largish table is painful.
I don't actually think having the process done in real time will
help, though -- it seems to me what would be more useful is an even
lazier vacuum: something that could be told "clean up as cycles are
available, but make sure you stay out of the way." Of course, that's
easy to say glibly, and mighty hard to do, I expect.
A
--
----
Andrew Sullivan 204-4141 Yonge Street
Liberty RMS Toronto, Ontario Canada
<andrew(at)libertyrms(dot)info> M2P 2A8
+1 416 646 3304 x110
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ron Johnson | 2003-08-20 20:52:40 | Changed mailing list functionality? |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-08-20 20:49:21 | Re: Buglist |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jan Wieck | 2003-08-20 21:21:35 | Re: Buglist |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-08-20 20:49:21 | Re: Buglist |