From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: vacuum internals and performance affect |
Date: | 2011-11-30 21:19:09 |
Message-ID: | 4ED69DCD.5000806@agliodbs.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
MX,
> to my understanding, vacuum just marks the dead rows of a table so that from
> that point on that space would be re-used for new inserts and new updates on
> that specific table. however, if there is an open transaction, vacuum can
> only do what is described above up to the point that the open transaction
> was started. so if for example there is a query running for 1 day, no matter
> how many times i will have vacuumed the table (manual or auto), the dead
> rows wont be possible to be marked as re-usable space.
> -is the above correct?
More or less. The transactionID isn't a timestamp, so the "stop point"
is based on snapshots rather than a point-in-time. But that's a fine
distinction.
> -is there something more about vacuum in that case i am describing? would
> for example mark the rows as 'semi-dead' so that when a scan would be made
> these rows wouldn't be checked and so the queries would be faster? is there
> anything else for this specific case?
Well, vacuum does some other work, yes.
> -would there be any effect from the vacuum on the indexes of the table?like
> i said above for the table, would the entries of the index not be scanned
> for a query, due to some reason?
Vacuum also does some pruning dead index pointers.
Otherwise, I'm not sure what you're asking.
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | MirrorX | 2011-11-30 21:34:20 | Re: vacuum internals and performance affect |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2011-11-30 20:58:28 | Re: Problems with FTS |