From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
---|---|
To: | John Lumby <johnlumby(at)hotmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Subject: | Re: REINDEX : new parameter to preserve current average leaf density as new implicit FILLFACTOR |
Date: | 2019-07-08 19:19:03 |
Message-ID: | CAH2-WzmvwNv81Ad1qU8yvSf8zPHtyNmLJRArwif_3PgdiLiSvg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 12:10 PM John Lumby <johnlumby(at)hotmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Actually the test workload does not run any explicit VACUUM command,
> it relies on autovacuum with these settings
> (same settings for 9.4 and 12beta2)
> To correspond to your " more churn between each VACUUM"
> Would you then suggest increasing
> autovacuum_vacuum_cost_delay and/or autovacuum_vacuum_scale_factor?
Well, you're still running autovacuum very aggressively here. It'll
easily keep up when run on a relatively small table such as this.
BTW, you should definitely run the latest point release of 9.4 -- not
9.4.6. You're missing years of bug fixes by sticking to such an old
point release, including some rather nasty ones -- 9.4.23 is the
current 9.4 point release. Actually, 9.4 is going to lose support this
year, as the oldest stable version that's currently supported by the
community.
--
Peter Geoghegan
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Mercha | 2019-07-08 19:20:25 | Re: Measuring the Query Optimizer Effect: Turning off the QO? |
Previous Message | Tom Mercha | 2019-07-08 19:17:00 | Re: Measuring the Query Optimizer Effect: Turning off the QO? |