From: | chirag(dot)dave(at)gmail(dot)com |
---|---|
To: | "Francisco Reyes" <lists(at)stringsutils(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Pgsql performance" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Vacuum statistics |
Date: | 2008-05-02 14:09:49 |
Message-ID: | f1d4f3170805020709r378df971y7dc46490a4c7776d@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
What version of Postgres you are running ?
If you are using 8.3, you can use pg_stat_all_tables.If Not you can use
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/pgstattuple.html
Chirag
On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 8:14 AM, Francisco Reyes <lists(at)stringsutils(dot)com>
wrote:
> I recall reading posts in the past where one could query the stat tables
> and see how well autovacuum was performing. Not finding the posts.
>
>
> I found this query:
> SELECT relname, relkind, reltuples, relpages FROM pg_class where relkind =
> 'r';
>
> From the output how can I tell the number of dead tuples? Or how effective
> autovacuum is in the particular table..
>
> Recently inheritted several large Postgresql DBs (tables in the hundreds
> of millions and some tables over a billion rows) and I am just starting to
> go over them and see how autovacuum has been performing.
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2008-05-02 14:29:34 | Re: Please ignore ... |
Previous Message | Claus Guttesen | 2008-05-02 07:51:09 | Re: Pros and Cons of 8.3.1 |