From: | Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | jaya kumar <kumardba27(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-admin(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Autovacuum------Doubts |
Date: | 2024-04-08 16:44:15 |
Message-ID: | CAMkU=1y-w94FSwo3hA7SdGze3EWEynEk0nLzGSgD52Q2mr6tag@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin |
On Mon, Apr 8, 2024 at 12:35 PM jaya kumar <kumardba27(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Hi Jeff,
>
> Superb. Now it's working fine as I expected.
>
> If I will set autovacuum_vacuum_scale_factor parameter value=0 is fine.
>
> If I set production database autovacuum_vacuum_scale_factor parameter 0.
> Do I face any database performance issues?
>
Yes, your tables will be vacuumed far more than is sensible. The vacuum
will consume resources that would be better used elsewhere, and some tables
that need very frequent vacuuming might be starved of it because it is too
busy vacuuming other tables which don't really need it.
If zero were generally a better value, it would have been made the
default. This setting is only useful for pedagogical purposes. I have set
it to zero on individual tables on occasion, in conjunction with raising
their threshold value, when those tables need to keep their visibility map
tuned up.
Cheers,
Jeff
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jeff Janes | 2024-04-08 17:27:41 | Re: Work_mem |
Previous Message | jaya kumar | 2024-04-08 16:35:41 | Re: Autovacuum------Doubts |