| 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: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | 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
| 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? |