| From: | Jinhua Luo <luajit(dot)io(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: insert/update performance |
| Date: | 2016-01-23 13:22:25 |
| Message-ID: | CAAc9rOx1YCAb0TSAJNPnM7t2gv_Svj3NPvGdH+9HixuVK6djUg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
2016-01-23 18:40 GMT+08:00 Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>:
> At the moment, I am also not able to see why it is so. You might
> want to first try with a simple test (Can you extract insert/update
> statements from application and run it manually for couple of times
> and then run Vacuum to see the result).
I try to do it manually, the issue is the same. It's weird that for
the index, the number of removed rows is correct. Just the table
itself is wrong (Sometimes it's correct too, it seems that it's a
random issue, I'm so confused).
>
> By anychance have you set a value for vacuum_defer_cleanup_age?
>
No, I do not configure it.
Regards,
Jinhua Luo
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David Rowley | 2016-01-23 13:51:03 | Re: Removing Functionally Dependent GROUP BY Columns |
| Previous Message | Tomas Vondra | 2016-01-23 12:07:01 | Re: PoC: Partial sort |