| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | tyagel(at)yahoo(dot)com |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Vacuum related question |
| Date: | 2004-09-18 16:06:24 |
| Message-ID: | 4715.1095523584@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
"G. Thomas Yagel, Jr." <tyagel(at)yahoo(dot)com> writes:
> After 12 hours I stopped inserting recods and started a "vacuum verbose".
> The vacuuming has taken almost 2 hours now and is not even finished. What I
> don't understand is why there is so much vacuuming to be done on some tables
> that are only being inserted into. As an example, I have pasted the output
> from the vacuuming of the pg_largeobject table.
You may think you've only inserted, but this output says differently:
> INFO: "pg_largeobject": found 18317486 removable, 21326336 nonremovable row
> versions in 2119638 pages
Those 18 million dead rows didn't appear out of nowhere; they could only
have come from deleting or updating large objects (BLOBs).
The reason for the multiple index-cleaning cycles is that vacuum_mem was
only high enough to remember about 1.4 million dead rows at a time.
You could have sped up the process by setting vacuum_mem higher.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-09-18 16:22:09 | Re: pg_restore peculiarities |
| Previous Message | Christopher Browne | 2004-09-18 15:26:25 | Re: Support on Enterprise Linux (newbie) |