| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> | 
|---|---|
| To: | cjwhite(at)cisco(dot)com | 
| Cc: | "'Robert Treat'" <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>, pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org | 
| Subject: | Re: Question about DB VACUUM | 
| Date: | 2003-10-07 03:52:39 | 
| Message-ID: | 20334.1065498759@sss.pgh.pa.us | 
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email | 
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin | 
"Chris White \(cjwhite\)" <cjwhite(at)cisco(dot)com> writes:
> Why aren't there any unused tuples?
The "unused" number isn't especially interesting, it's just the number
of line pointer slots that were once used and aren't at the moment.
At 4 bytes apiece, they aren't costing you anything worth noticing.
> Why is the pg_largeobject_loid_pn_index table so big (2818 pages)?
This looks like a standard "index bloat" problem (see the archives
for details).  "REINDEX pg_largeobject" would make the bloat go away
for awhile.  7.4 should largely solve this problem, but in earlier
releases you need to figure on periodic reindexing.
> Why has table grown by 4 pages.
Probably because there are now 460 live tuples instead of 227.
I don't think you've entirely fixed your problem of not removing
all unused large objects...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Chris White (cjwhite) | 2003-10-07 04:06:22 | Re: Question about DB VACUUM | 
| Previous Message | Chris White (cjwhite) | 2003-10-07 01:50:13 | Re: Question about DB VACUUM |