Re: Vacuum problem

From: S H <msq001(at)live(dot)com>
To: "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Vacuum problem
Date: 2013-05-19 01:13:57
Message-ID: BAY155-W585FADC7C7BDF9F8ED02F7FDAE0@phx.gbl
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

I confirmed that there is no bloating unfortunately.
Did some experiment and it seems that connection open are always slow in case of vacuuming..
- Experiment done are as follows:-- Do frequent vacuuming.- Execute xx connections every min and close after one sec.- when vacuum is running connection open takes time.
I can almost 100% reduce it when my database size is 30 MB only with 1.5 bloating.

> Date: Tue, 14 May 2013 10:54:04 -0600
> Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Vacuum problem
> From: scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com
> To: msq001(at)live(dot)com
> CC: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
>
> Not saying you HAVE bloating there, saying you MIGHT.
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Julian 2013-05-19 02:43:09 Re: Best practice on inherited tables
Previous Message Tom Lane 2013-05-18 23:26:11 Re: cal I pass arguments directly to final function in aggregates