| From: | "Ed L(dot)" <pgsql(at)bluepolka(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jim(at)nasby(dot)net> |
| Subject: | Re: autovac hung/blocked |
| Date: | 2006-11-16 16:08:34 |
| Message-ID: | 200611160908.34980.pgsql@bluepolka.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Thursday November 16 2006 3:33 am, Richard Huxton wrote:
> Ed L. wrote:
> > One idea would be to partition the table some how such that
> > the chunks getting vacuumed are much smaller and thus not
> > such an impact. On the app side, I suppose we could break
> > the table into multiple tables on some dimension (time) to
> > make the vacuum impacts smaller.
>
> You're running on bigger datasets than I'm used to, but that
> would be my approach. Did you notice the constraint
> partitioning introduced in 8.1?
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.1/static/ddl-partitioning.htm
>l#DDL-PARTITIONING-CONSTRAINT-EXCLUSION
Thanks for the tip. We have avoided use of inheritance in order
to stay closer to the beaten path, but the partitioning
implementation ideas are useful.
Ed
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-11-16 16:39:01 | Re: can't start postgresql |
| Previous Message | Ardian Xharra | 2006-11-16 15:55:47 | Why the data changes it's value by itself! |