Re: Buglist

From: Andrew Sullivan <andrew(at)libertyrms(dot)info>
To: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Buglist
Date: 2003-08-21 20:22:37
Message-ID: 20030821202236.GE10003@libertyrms.info
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 09:10:34PM +0530, Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
> Well, nothing can help if the database has dead tuples already.
> Sometime somebody has to take time to run vacuum full and/or
> database reload to get a clean state.

But if you have a busy system, you'll have new dead tuples.

> Point I am trying to make is to tune FSM and autovacuum frequency
> such that you catch all the dead tuples in RAM, which is
> non-blocking operation at the expense of some CPU power. I am sure
> 1 min autovacuum I suggested is waaay too aggressive for any
> scheduled vacuum isn't it?

Not for some cases. In (say) 40% write situation, you have _lots_ of
dead tuples. Perhaps you can make the application more efficient,
but that's not always an option (maybe you don't have the code).

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 15:40:34 from Shridhar Daithankar

Responses

  • Re: Buglist at 2003-08-22 06:47:41 from Shridhar Daithankar

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ian Barwick 2003-08-21 20:28:52 Re: [GENERAL] Need concrete "Why Postgres not MySQL" bullet list
Previous Message Andrew Sullivan 2003-08-21 20:20:03 Re: Buglist

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ian Barwick 2003-08-21 20:28:52 Re: [GENERAL] Need concrete "Why Postgres not MySQL" bullet list
Previous Message Andrew Sullivan 2003-08-21 20:20:03 Re: Buglist