From: | Mike Mascari <mascarm(at)mascari(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | gavin(at)ipalsoftware(dot)com, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Large table performance and vacuum |
Date: | 2004-03-05 22:48:00 |
Message-ID: | 404903A0.7040701@mascari.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Gavin Scott <gavin(at)ipalsoftware(dot)com> writes:
>
>>The problem is the query "SELECT * FROM log ORDER BY hid
>>LIMIT 1;", which both EXPLAIN and EXPLAIN ANALYZE show as
>>Limit / Index Scan on hid_idx. This was very fast before we
>>started deleting out old log entries the table, but has
>>started taking an extremely long time, about 341 seconds.
>
>
> I'm suspecting that you need to REINDEX hid_idx. This is an
> aspect of the pre-7.4 "index bloat" problem: the left end of the index
> now consists of entirely-empty pages, which not only occupy space but
> take time to scan through for a query like this.
Assuming a "normal" usage pattern, regular VACUUMing, and no
instances of corrupted indexes, are there any scenarios in which one
would need to REINDEX either user or system tables post 7.4?
Mike Mascari
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-03-05 23:06:21 | Re: Large table performance and vacuum |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-03-05 22:07:55 | Re: Large table performance and vacuum |