Re: Vacuum ALL FULL

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: S Arvind <arvindwill(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Vacuum ALL FULL
Date: 2009-06-06 23:12:31
Message-ID: 411.1244329951@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

S Arvind <arvindwill(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> So do i have to increase the max_fsm_relation based on (Average_no_relation
> per db * number of db)? if so it will be very high since in our one db
> server we have 200 db with average 800 tables in each db. What is the value
> we have to give for this kind of server?

About 160000.

One wonders whether you shouldn't rethink your schema design. Large
numbers of small tables usually are not a good use of SQL. (I assume
they're small, else you'd have had serious bloat problems already from
your undersized max_fsm_pages setting ...)

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message S Arvind 2009-06-06 23:28:49 Re: Vacuum ALL FULL
Previous Message S Arvind 2009-06-06 23:09:40 Re: Vacuum ALL FULL