Re: problems with large table

Phoenix Kiula escribió:
> On 13/09/2007, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
> > Mike Charnoky wrote:
> >
> > > Alvaro: The cluster suggestion probably won't help in my case since data
> > > in the table should already be naturally ordered by date.
> >
> > It's not helpful only for reordering, but also for getting rid of dead
> > tuples.
>
> Apart from creating a new table, indexing it, then renaming it to
> original table -- is there an alternative to CLUSTER that doesn't
> impose a painful ACCESS EXCLUSIVE lock on the table? We are on
> Postgres 8.2.3 and have a heavy duty table that starts showing its
> limits after a week or so. Autovacuum is on and working. FSM etc is
> fine, maintenance_work_mem is 256MB. But cluster still takes upwards
> of 30 minutes, which is unacceptable downtime for our web service.
> Thanks for any tips!

How large is this table, and how frequently is it updated?

--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.amazon.com/gp/registry/DXLWNGRJD34J
"El Maquinismo fue proscrito so pena de cosquilleo hasta la muerte"
(Ijon Tichy en Viajes, Stanislaw Lem)