| From: | Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Csaba Nagy <nagy(at)ecircle-ag(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org>, Postgres general mailing list <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Second attempt, roll your own autovacuum |
| Date: | 2006-12-19 16:20:11 |
| Message-ID: | 4588113B.70600@archonet.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
Csaba Nagy wrote:
>> Alternatively, perhaps a threshold so that a table is only considered
>> for vacuum if:
>> (table-size * overall-activity-in-last-hour) < threshold
>> Ideally you'd define your units appropriately so that you could just
>> define threshold in postgresql.conf as 30% (of peak activity in last 100
>> hours say).
>
> No, this is definitely not enough. The problem scenario is when
> autovacuum starts vacuuming a huge table and that keeps it busy 10 hours
> and in the meantime the small but frequently updated tables get awfully
> bloated...
Ah (lightbulb goes on)! I see what you mean now.
--
Richard Huxton
Archonet Ltd
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Matthew O'Connor | 2006-12-19 16:21:00 | Re: Let's play bash the search engine |
| Previous Message | Oleg Bartunov | 2006-12-19 16:16:39 | Re: Let's play bash the search engine |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2006-12-19 16:22:47 | Re: Second attempt, roll your own autovacuum |
| Previous Message | Csaba Nagy | 2006-12-19 16:06:40 | Re: Second attempt, roll your own autovacuum |