From: | Hornyak Laszlo <kocka(at)tigrasoft(dot)hu> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [ADMIN] postgres 6.2 vacuum |
Date: | 2003-09-25 06:36:05 |
Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.21.0309250818410.1830-100000@tiger.tigrasoft.hu |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin pgsql-hackers |
I think it is not that simple. How should I explain the company leaders
why I must stop the system. It may risk their bussiness success too. I can
tell them that the new db is more stable, but until the old one does the
job, it is still acceptable for them (it served the system for 5-6 years
or so). Once it crashes, it is a good reason to do the move.
Laszlo
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> I wonder if we should have an auto-responder so when someone says they
> are running 6.5, we can reply --- Yikes, upgrade.
>
> In fact, we could go with a little chart:
>
> 7.3.4 great
> 7.3.0-3 please upgrade, it is easy
> 7.2 consider upgrading
> 7.1 wow, that is old
> 7.0 you need an upgrade, pal
> <=6.5 run, don't walk, to the nearest PostgreSQL ftp server
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Hornyak Laszlo wrote:
> >
> > Yes, at the end we did the port at night, and in the morning the system
> > started without any problem. Some of the dumps from pg 6.2 was not realy
> > acceptable by 7.3, but it was easy to fix.
> >
> > Thank you for your help!
> >
> > Laszlo Hornyak
> >
> > On Tue, 23 Sep 2003, scott.marlowe wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, 22 Sep 2003, Hornyak Laszlo wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi all!
> > > >
> > > > We have a database on postgreSQL 6.2 and it is extremely slow, so we
> > > > started vacuum on it. I know it locks the tables, so clients can not use
> > > > it until the process is finished, but it is extremely slow on a 1.800.000
> > > > record table and we don't know how to make it faster. Can anybody help me?
> > > >
> > > > It seems it is writing an index file, but it grows very slowly.
> > > >
> > > > I know we should use 7.3 at least, we are working on it, but we need to
> > > > survive this day with 6.2 :(
> > >
> > > In all honesty, it'd probably be faster to convert than to wait for that
> > > vacuum to finish.
> > >
> > > seriously.
> > >
> > > 6.2 is like the model A of Postgresql versions.
> > >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> > TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
> > (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> >
>
> --
> Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
> pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
> + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
> + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Somasekhar Bangalore | 2003-09-25 09:01:46 | how to take a single table data backup in postgres 7.2.3 database.? |
Previous Message | George A.J | 2003-09-25 03:39:05 | Case Insensitive comparison |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Heikki Tuuri | 2003-09-25 06:37:11 | Re: PostgreSQL not ACID compliant? |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2003-09-25 06:08:57 | Re: Error message cleanup |