Re: design question: general db performance

From: Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com>
To: shane hill <shill(at)adobe(dot)com>, pgsql-performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: design question: general db performance
Date: 2003-11-25 19:27:39
Message-ID: 200311251927.39671.dev@archonet.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On Tuesday 25 November 2003 18:42, shane hill wrote:
>
> Our db is getting to be a respectable size (about 10GB right now) and is
> growing slower and slower. I have been charged with making it faster and
> with a smaller footprint while retaining all of the current
> functionality. here is one of my ideas. Please tell me if I am crazy:

Your idea of using an integer makes sense - that's how it is stored on unix
anyway.

Are you familiar with VACUUM/VACUUM FULL/REINDEX and when you should use them?
If not, that's a good place to start. Try a VACUUM FULL on frequently updated
tables and see if that reduces your disk size.

You'll probably want to check the performance notes too:
http://www.varlena.com/varlena/GeneralBits/Tidbits/index.php

--
Richard Huxton
Archonet Ltd

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Torsten Schulz 2003-11-25 19:39:05 [Fwd: Re: Optimize]
Previous Message Jeff 2003-11-25 19:23:18 Re: design question: general db performance