Re: Why pgAdmin III guru suggests VACUUM in 8.1

From: "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com>
To: Andrus <eetasoft(at)online(dot)ee>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Why pgAdmin III guru suggests VACUUM in 8.1
Date: 2005-11-22 20:59:05
Message-ID: 20051122205904.GA7086@pervasive.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 09:33:34PM +0200, Andrus wrote:
> Jim,
>
> > Upsizes? Are you adding more data? If so then yes, analyze would be
> > good, though autovacuum should handle it for you.
>
> I create new Postgres database, upsize a lot of data into it. After that

FWIW, people generally refer to that as 'loading data'; I've never heard
of 'upsizing' before, which is why I was somewhat confused.

> this database goes online and will receive a lot of transactions daily.
> I'm using PG 8.1 default postgres.conf file.

Well, by default autovacuum is turned off. Aside from that there's other
things you'll want to tune. Take a look at the annotated postgresql.conf
that's in techdocs.

> I read than autovacuum may skip some tables which can cause wrong guru
> hints.
>
> So it seems that I should run manually VACUUM ANALYZE for the whole database
> once for initial statistics colection of those tables, isn't it?

No real need to vacuum, just running analyze on the entire database
would suffice.
--
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com
Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Matthew T. O'Connor 2005-11-22 21:05:47 Re: Why pgAdmin III guru suggests VACUUM in 8.1
Previous Message Andrus 2005-11-22 19:33:34 Re: Why pgAdmin III guru suggests VACUUM in 8.1