From: | Bill Moran <wmoran(at)collaborativefusion(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
Cc: | PG-General Mailing List <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Vaccuum best practice: cronjob or autovaccuum? |
Date: | 2008-08-28 16:04:36 |
Message-ID: | 20080828120436.555bd3c2.wmoran@collaborativefusion.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
In response to Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>:
> For the record:
>
> Bill Moran escribió:
>
> > The naptime at 600 is probably a bad idea. If you only have one user
> > database on this system, then it only gets investigated by autovac once
> > every 40 minutes (template0 ... template1 ... postgres ... yourdb)
> > Consider that autovac uses very little resources when it determines that
> > it has no work to do.
>
> Note that on 8.3, the meaning of naptime has changed -- it would be
> effectively "check each database once every 10 minutes" if set at 600.
> This was changed precisely because the previous semantics were difficult
> to explain/use.
Ooo ... that's an exciting "gotcha"!
--
Bill Moran
Collaborative Fusion Inc.
http://people.collaborativefusion.com/~wmoran/
wmoran(at)collaborativefusion(dot)com
Phone: 412-422-3463x4023
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2008-08-28 16:07:05 | Re: pg_dump problem |
Previous Message | Alan Hodgson | 2008-08-28 15:54:54 | Re: Partitioned Tables - How/Can does slony handle it? |