Re: Press Release

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: Rod Taylor <rbt(at)rbt(dot)ca>, Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com>, Postgresql Advocacy <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Press Release
Date: 2003-10-30 00:37:40
Message-ID: 200310291637.40467.josh@agliodbs.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy

Josh,

> O.k. maybe I am missing something.. but what can I do to make it so a
> vacuum full
> isn't required? Is this some 7.4 magic that I don't know about?

"magic" we've had since 7.2.0, Josh.

If your max_fsm_pages is set to higher than the level of data pages you
recycle between vacuums, and you don't run out of memory on the machine for
significant periods, then you need never do a vacuum_full.

The functionality in 7.4 extends this to indexes, eliminating the REINDEX in
most cases.

--
-Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Rod Taylor 2003-10-30 00:38:49 Re: Press Release
Previous Message Joshua D. Drake 2003-10-30 00:34:28 Re: Press Release