From: | Anj Adu <fotographs(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Aris Samad-Yahaya <aris(at)quickschools(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: CREATE TABLE slowing down significantly over time |
Date: | 2009-11-09 14:46:29 |
Message-ID: | f2fd819a0911090646w159e6e4bu309742528554068f@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Why is reindex needed ? Unless most of the key values get deleted
frequently..this is not needed. (I am assuming postgres 8.x and above)
On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 7:58 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 11:58 PM, Aris Samad-Yahaya
> <aris(at)quickschools(dot)com> wrote:
>> We vacuum analyze nightly, and vacuum normally ad-hoc (but we're going to
>> schedule this weekly moving forward).
>>
>> Interesting pointer about system catalog bloat. I tried to vacuum full the
>> system catalog tables (pg_*), and the performance for creating a single
>> table manually improved dramatically (back to what it used to be), but as
>> soon as I created the next schema, the performance went back down to the
>> same level.
>>
>> So there's a clue there somewhere. Next I will try to vacuum full the entire
>> database.
>
> And maybe REINDEX, too.
>
> ...Robert
>
> --
> 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 | Scott Marlowe | 2009-11-09 15:33:12 | Re: CREATE TABLE slowing down significantly over time |
Previous Message | Dimitri Fontaine | 2009-11-09 14:34:13 | Re: maintaining a reference to a fetched row |