| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Shankar K <shan0075(at)yahoo(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: interpret vacuum verbose output |
| Date: | 2003-06-05 13:59:45 |
| Message-ID: | 2104.1054821585@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin |
Shankar K <shan0075(at)yahoo(dot)com> writes:
> I'm trying to evaluate the frequecy to run vacuum
> analyze on key tables. so if anyone could help me to
> interpret the output of vacuum analyze verbose output
> that would be great.
> INFO: Removed 55448 tuples in 2367 pages.
> CPU 0.04s/0.11u sec elapsed 0.41 sec.
> INFO: Pages 11266: Changed 4, Empty 0; Tup 231: Vac
> 55448, Keep 0, UnUsed 205434.
This says that you have 231 live tuples versus 55448 that were removed ---
in other words, less than one-half of one percent of your table was
current data. You need to vacuum this table a LOT more often than
you are doing.
You will need a VACUUM FULL and a REINDEX to get the table and index
physical sizes down to something reasonable, after which a more rigorous
schedule of plain vacuums ought to keep things in shape.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Vinay | 2003-06-05 14:12:25 | Starting postmaster as a service (newbie) |
| Previous Message | Mendola Gaetano | 2003-06-05 13:53:49 | Re: Backup and Restore |