From: | Michael Riess <mlriess(at)gmx(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Autovacuum / full vacuum |
Date: | 2006-01-17 14:50:38 |
Message-ID: | dqj07o$2tl4$1@news.hub.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Well,
I think that the documentation is not exactly easy to understand. I
always wondered why there are no examples for common postgresql
configurations. All I know is that the default configuration seems to be
too low for production use. And while running postgres I get no hints as
to which setting needs to be increased to improve performance. I have no
chance to see if my FSM settings are too low other than to run vacuum
full verbose in psql, pipe the result to a text file and grep for some
words to get a somewhat comprehensive idea of how much unused space
there is in my system.
Don't get me wrong - I really like PostgreSQL and it works well in my
application. But somehow I feel that it might run much better ...
about the FSM: You say that increasing the FSM is fairly cheap - how
should I know that?
>> did you read my post? In the first part I explained why I don't want
>> to increase the FSM that much.
>
> No, you didn't. You explained *that* you thought you didn't want to
> increase the FSM. You didn't explain why.
>
> FSM expansion comes fairly cheap ...
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Sullivan | 2006-01-17 14:56:49 | Re: Autovacuum / full vacuum |
Previous Message | Larry Rosenman | 2006-01-17 14:36:53 | Re: Autovacuum / full vacuum |