| From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Rob Nagler <nagler(at)bivio(dot)biz>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: vacuum locking |
| Date: | 2003-10-17 16:36:25 |
| Message-ID: | 200310170936.25997.josh@agliodbs.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Rob,
> vacuum_mem might be slowing down the system? But if I reduce it,
> won't vacuuming get slower?
Yes, but it will have less of an impact on the system while it's running.
> INFO: Removed 8368 tuples in 427 pages.
> CPU 0.06s/0.04u sec elapsed 1.54 sec.
> INFO: Pages 24675: Changed 195, Empty 0; Tup 1031519: Vac 8368, Keep 254,
> UnUsed 1739. Total CPU 2.92s/2.58u sec elapsed 65.35 sec.
>
> INFO: Removed 232 tuples in 108 pages.
> CPU 0.01s/0.02u sec elapsed 0.27 sec.
> INFO: Pages 74836: Changed 157, Empty 0; Tup 4716475: Vac 232, Keep 11,
> UnUsed 641.
> Total CPU 10.19s/6.03u sec elapsed 261.44 sec.
What sort of disk array do you have? That seems like a lot of time
considering how little work VACUUM is doing.
--
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Murthy Kambhampaty | 2003-10-17 17:33:36 | Re: [PERFORM] backup/restore - another area. |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-10-17 16:05:25 | Re: [PERFORM] backup/restore - another area. |