From: | Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "shakahshakah(at)gmail(dot)com" <shakahshakah(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: newbie design question re impact of VACUUM |
Date: | 2005-11-09 14:58:11 |
Message-ID: | 43720E83.1010809@archonet.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
shakahshakah(at)gmail(dot)com wrote:
> After looking at "Chapter 22. Routine Database Maintenance Tasks"
> (http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.1/interactive/maintenance.html) I
> started wondering about what (if any) consideration to give to to
> VACUUM issues in the following context.
>
> As a background, I'll be using Postgres in part as a processing queue
> for a 40-column stream of information (~ 250 bytes/row) with a
> sustained input rate of 20 rows/sec. This queue will be processed
> periodically (every few minutes), design constraints are to (1) only
> process each row once, and (2) keep the processed rows around for a
> period of time (say a month or so).
I would have the application vacuum the queue table after processing a
batch of rows. That's about as small as you could keep the table's disk
usage.
You are right in that updating the row will basically create a new
version of the row.
--
Richard Huxton
Archonet Ltd
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Csaba Nagy | 2005-11-09 15:08:28 | Re: Question on Insert / Update |
Previous Message | A. Kretschmer | 2005-11-09 14:57:43 | Re: How to obtain the code af a function ? |