| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Mark Woodward <pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: vacuum, performance, and MVCC |
| Date: | 2006-06-22 13:59:06 |
| Message-ID: | 20060622135906.GI29883@surnet.cl |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Mark Woodward wrote:
> Hmm, OK, then the problem is more serious than I suspected.
> This means that every index on a row has to be updated on every
> transaction that modifies that row. Is that correct?
Add an index entry, yes.
> I am attaching some code that shows the problem with regard to
> applications such as web server session management, when run, each second
> the system can handle fewer and fewer connections. Here is a brief output:
> [...]
> There has to be a more linear way of handling this scenario.
So vacuum the table often.
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Mark Woodward | 2006-06-22 13:59:42 | Re: vacuum, performance, and MVCC |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2006-06-22 13:58:32 | Re: postmaster.exe vs postgres.exe (was: CVS HEAD busted |