Re: Vacuum advice

From: David Mitchell <david(dot)mitchell(at)telogis(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Vacuum advice
Date: 2005-06-23 01:47:45
Message-ID: 42BA14C1.4030201@telogis.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

>
>>We're thinking we might set up vacuum_cost_limit to around 100 and put
>>vacuum_cost_delay at 100 and then just run vacuumdb in a cron job every
>>15 minutes or so, does this sound silly?
>
>
> It doesn't sound completely silly, but if you are doing inserts and not
> updates/deletes then there's not anything for VACUUM to do, really.
> An ANALYZE command might get the same result with less effort.

I think that perhaps the fact we are doing updates in the secondary
table to track the import is the culprit here. It gets updated for each
item inserted into the main table, so even though it has 500 rows, it
ended up with about 2million dead tuples, which left a lot to be desired
in terms of seq scan speed. Vacuum full cleared this up, so I assume a
frequent regular vacuum would keep it in tip top condition.

We are using PG 8.0.1.

Thanks for your help Tom.

--
David Mitchell
Software Engineer
Telogis

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message William Yu 2005-06-23 03:56:06 Re: setting up PostgreSQL on Linux RHL9 to allow ODBC connections
Previous Message Tom Lane 2005-06-23 01:37:51 Re: PROBLEM: Function does not exist