| From: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl>, Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, Mark Kirkwood <markir(at)coretech(dot)co(dot)nz>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Frequently updated tables |
| Date: | 2004-06-09 18:14:51 |
| Message-ID: | 40C7539B.3030807@commandprompt.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>
> Sigh, because vacuums take away from performance.
This is a known issue that has been pretty much resolved for 7.5. Vacuum
in 7.5 does not take even close to as much IO resources.
Imagine a table that has
> to be updated on the order of a few thousand times a minute. Think about
> the drop in performance during the vacuum.
>
> On a one row table, vacuum is not so bad, but try some benchmarks on a
> table with a goodly number of rows.
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your
> joining column's datatypes do not match
--
Command Prompt, Inc., home of Mammoth PostgreSQL - S/ODBC and S/JDBC
Postgresql support, programming shared hosting and dedicated hosting.
+1-503-667-4564 - jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com - http://www.commandprompt.com
Mammoth PostgreSQL Replicator. Integrated Replication for PostgreSQL
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| jd.vcf | text/x-vcard | 640 bytes |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2004-06-09 18:16:17 | Re: Frequently updated tables |
| Previous Message | Bruno Wolff III | 2004-06-09 18:12:30 | Re: Frequently updated tables |