| From: | S Arvind <arvindwill(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Vacuum ALL FULL |
| Date: | 2009-06-06 22:59:53 |
| Message-ID: | abf9211d0906061559l4e77783cy1d18f5f3f0e087d0@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
So is it no use running
vacuumdb --all --analyze --full
as fsm map is full?
-Arvind S
On Sun, Jun 7, 2009 at 4:24 AM, S Arvind <arvindwill(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Thanks Tom,
> So do i have to increase the max_fsm_relation based on (Average_no_relation
> per db * number of db)? if so it will be very high since in our one db
> server we have 200 db with average 800 tables in each db. What is the value
> we have to give for this kind of server?
>
> -Arvind S
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 7, 2009 at 4:15 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
>> S Arvind <arvindwill(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> > But there nearly only 300 tables in that db. Is the free space map is
>> per
>> > DB or for all DB. Can i know the reason of this problem?
>>
>> It's across all DBs in the installation.
>>
>> regards, tom lane
>>
>
>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2009-06-06 23:02:33 | Re: Vacuum ALL FULL |
| Previous Message | S Arvind | 2009-06-06 22:54:29 | Re: Vacuum ALL FULL |