| From: | "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Yury Bokhoncovich" <byg(at)center-f1(dot)ru> |
| Cc: | "Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCHES] Big number of "unused" pages as reported by VACUUM |
| Date: | 2002-09-06 07:20:43 |
| Message-ID: | GNELIHDDFBOCMGBFGEFOCEBNCEAA.chriskl@familyhealth.com.au |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
> I make a guess I've got this due to parallel running of a program making
> bulk INSERTs/UPDATEs into that table. Mmm...I need a way to avoid the big
> number of unused pages in such a case. LOCK TABLE?
Well, I suggest doing a normal vacuum analyze ('VACUUM ANALYZE goods') after
every bulk insert/update. This will go through the table and mark all new
outdated tuples as re-usable. That way, when you do your next bulk
insert/update it will be able to reuse the unused tuples. Give that a
try...
Chris
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD | 2002-09-06 07:33:03 | Re: [PATCHES] Big number of "unused" pages as reported by |
| Previous Message | Bruno Wolff III | 2002-09-06 07:09:21 | Making small bits of code available |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-09-06 13:56:17 | Re: Big number of "unused" pages as reported by VACUUM |
| Previous Message | Yury Bokhoncovich | 2002-09-06 06:56:52 | Re: [PATCHES] Big number of "unused" pages as reported by |