Re: Buglist

From: Andrew Sullivan <andrew(at)libertyrms(dot)info>
To: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Buglist
Date: 2003-08-21 15:26:03
Message-ID: 20030821152602.GH9803@libertyrms.info
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 08:38:14PM +0530, Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
> If a database is clean i.e. no dead tuple, an autovacuum daemon with 1 min
> interval can achieve pretty much same result, isn't it?

But we're talking about the case of large, busy databases that have
already choked their disks. We have the same problem here in our
test machines. We start running load tests, and with vacuums nicely
scheduled and everything we start topping out on the performance
pretty quickly, because of I/O bottlenecks on the database. We know
the difference in I/O bandwidth between our test env. and the
production env., so we can put in a fudge factor for this; but that's
it.

A

--
----
Andrew Sullivan 204-4141 Yonge Street
Liberty RMS Toronto, Ontario Canada
<andrew(at)libertyrms(dot)info> M2P 2A8
+1 416 646 3304 x110

In response to

  • Re: Buglist at 2003-08-21 15:08:14 from Shridhar Daithankar

Responses

  • Re: Buglist at 2003-08-21 15:40:34 from Shridhar Daithankar

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message expect 2003-08-21 15:28:51 Re: 7.4b1 vs 7.3.4 performance
Previous Message expect 2003-08-21 15:22:58 Re: 7.4b1 vs 7.3.4 performance

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Shridhar Daithankar 2003-08-21 15:40:34 Re: Buglist
Previous Message Shridhar Daithankar 2003-08-21 15:08:14 Re: Buglist