Re: [PORTS] vacuum takes too long

From: Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: dave(at)turbocat(dot)de (David Wetzel)
Cc: ports(at)postgreSQL(dot)org, hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [PORTS] vacuum takes too long
Date: 1999-01-07 00:50:37
Message-ID: 199901070050.TAA20530@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-ports

> > From: Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
>
> > > insert a few row in a table (>50000) and do
> > > delete from mytable;
> > > vacuum verbose analyze;
> > >
> > > Why is this that slow?
> >
> > Analyze checks every column in every row.
>
> even if you only type "vacuum verbose" it takes _very_ long.
>
> I deleted _all_ records with "delete from mytable;" before.
> A drop and a new create is faster. But what is when you delete (maybe
> 100000) rows but keep 100 in the table?
>
> I use 6.4.2 on NetBSD/i486 (that box makes gets 12MBytes/sec via the
> filesystem out of the drives)

Not sure what to say. Vacuum does take a while, and it is often faster
to drop and recreate.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 1999-01-07 01:16:52 Re: [HACKERS] Libpq functions
Previous Message Peter T Mount 1999-01-06 23:20:11 Re: [HACKERS] SQLJ

Browse pgsql-ports by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Unprivileged user 1999-01-07 01:35:01 Port Bug Report: The postgres server crashes
Previous Message David Wetzel 1999-01-06 22:38:29 Re: [PORTS] vacuum takes too long