FW: Postgres: VACUUM

From: <lnd(at)hnit(dot)is>
To: <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: FW: Postgres: VACUUM
Date: 2004-01-14 21:07:39
Message-ID: 0A5B2E3C3A64CA4AB14F76DBCA76DDA44E2CA1@seifur.hnit.is
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general


> On heavily used databases (over 100,000 transactions an
> hour), vacuum is
> a killer

That's about 27 tx/second - not so many, for some tasks at least.

If VACUUM is rather a killer
- are any plans from PostgreSQL to deal with that?

Thank you in advance,
Laimis

P.S. it's notable that every DB system I delt with had one or another issue
as far as concurency is concerned, take infamous "Oracle-1555 snapshot too
old" error as an example.

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Rick Gigger 2004-01-14 21:13:08 Re: Postgress and MYSQL
Previous Message Jonathan Bartlett 2004-01-14 21:07:10 Re: serverless postgresql