Re: Programatically switching database

From: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>
To: ow <oneway_111(at)yahoo(dot)com>
Cc: Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)yahoo(dot)com>, pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Programatically switching database
Date: 2003-11-17 06:17:45
Message-ID: 87brrba586.fsf@stark.dyndns.tv
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-sql

ow <oneway_111(at)yahoo(dot)com> writes:

> My concern though ... wouldn't pgSql server collapse when faced with
> transaction spawning across 100M+ records?

The number of records involved really doesn't faze Postgres at all. However
the amount of time spent in the transaction could be an issue if there is
other activity in other schemas of the same database.

As long as the transaction is running none of the deleted or old updated data
in any schema of the database can be cleaned up by vacuum as postgres thinks
the big transaction "might" need to see it sometime.

So if the rest of the database is still active the tables and indexes being
updated may grow larger than normal. If it goes on for a _really_ long time
they might need a VACUUM FULL at some point to clean them up.

--
greg

In response to

Browse pgsql-sql by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message cristi 2003-11-17 11:20:16 FATAL 2: PageIndexTupleDelete
Previous Message Randolf Richardson, DevNet SysOp 29 2003-11-17 05:54:52 Re: Closed