Re: vacuuming problems continued

Bloat doesn't depend on your update/delete rate; it depends on how many
update/deletes occur between vacuums. Long running transactions also
come into play.

As for performance, a P4 with 512M of ram is pretty much a toy in the
database world; it wouldn't be very hard to swamp it.

But without actual details there's no way to know.

On Wed, Jun 07, 2006 at 10:52:26PM +0200, Antoine wrote:
> Hi all and thanks for your responses. I haven't yet had a chance to
> tweak the autovac settings but I really don't think that things can be
> maxing out even the default settings.
> We have about 4 machines that are connected 24/7 - they were doing
> constant read/inserts (24/7) but that was because the code was
> rubbish. I managed to whinge enough to get the programme to read, do
> the work, then insert, and that means they are accessing (connected
> but idle) for less than 5% of the day. We have about another 10
> machines that access (reads and updates) from 8-5. It is running on a
> P4 with 256 or 512meg of ram and I simply refuse to believe this load
> is anything significant... :-(.
> There are only two tables that see any action, and the smaller one is
> almost exclusively inserts.
> Much as I believe it shouldn't be possible the ratio of 5:1 for the db
> vs fresh copy has given me a taste for a copy/drop scenario...
> I will try and increase settings and keep you posted.
> Cheers
> Antoine
>
>
> --
> This is where I should put some witty comment.
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
>

--
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