From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Łukasz Jagiełło <lukasz(dot)jagiello(at)gforces(dot)pl>, Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz <gryzman(at)gmail(dot)com>, Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Problems with autovacuum |
Date: | 2009-05-26 18:41:15 |
Message-ID: | 20090526184115.GI32650@alvh.no-ip.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Tom Lane escribió:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> > Tom Lane escribi:
> >> I believe the interpretation of autovacuum_naptime is that it should
> >> examine each database that often, ie once a minute by default. So
> >> it's got more than 30 databases per second to look through.
>
> > Note that this is correct in 8.1 and 8.2 but not 8.3 onwards.
>
> Oh? The current documentation still defines the variable thusly:
>
> Specifies the minimum delay between autovacuum runs on any given
> database. In each round the daemon examines the database and
> issues VACUUM and ANALYZE commands as needed for tables in that
> database.
Sorry, it's the other way around actually -- correct for 8.3 onwards,
wrong for 8.1 and 8.2. In the earlier versions, it would do one run in
a chosen database, sleep during "naptime", then do another run.
> I suppose the use of "minimum" means that this is not technically
> incorrect, but it's sure not very helpful if there is some other
> rule involved that causes it to not behave as I said. (And if there
> is some other rule, what is that?)
The word "minimum" is there because it's possible that all workers are
busy with some other database(s).
> Please improve the docs.
I'll see about that.
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2009-05-26 19:01:19 | Re: Problems with autovacuum |
Previous Message | Łukasz Jagiełło | 2009-05-26 18:36:34 | Re: Problems with autovacuum |