Re: Vacuum full: alternatives?

From: Andreas Kretschmer <andreas(at)a-kretschmer(dot)de>
To: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Vacuum full: alternatives?
Date: 2016-06-20 09:37:39
Message-ID: 5767B963.5090800@a-kretschmer.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Am 20.06.2016 um 11:18 schrieb Job:
> Hello,
>
> we have a table with an heavy traffic of pg_bulkload and delete of records.
> The size pass, in only one day, for example for 1Gb to 4Gb and then 1Gb back.
>
> We have important problems on size and the only way to gain free space is issueing a vacuum full <table>.
> But the operation is very slow, sometimes 2/4 hours, and table is not available for services as it is locked.
>
> We do not delete everything at one (in this case the truncate woudl resolve the problem).
>
> The autovacuum is not able (same for normal vacuum) to free the spaces.
>

autovaccum marks space as free, but don't give the space back to os.

I would suggest run only autovacuum, and with time you will see a not
more growing table. There is no need for vacuum full.

Andreas

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Job 2016-06-20 09:39:54 R: Vacuum full: alternatives?
Previous Message Rakesh Kumar 2016-06-20 09:34:24 Re: Vacuum full: alternatives?