Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PORTS] vacuum takes too long

From: Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: djackson(at)cpsgroup(dot)com (Jackson, DeJuan)
Cc: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org, dave(at)turbocat(dot)de, ports(at)postgreSQL(dot)org, hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PORTS] vacuum takes too long
Date: 1999-01-07 17:49:57
Message-ID: 199901071749.MAA07078@candle.pha.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-ports
> With MVCC an occasional 'vacuum analyze' should only be noticed from the
> performance improvements.  As far as I can tell most of the work done by
> an analyze is in reading the table data.  If you make sure to write the
> new information at the end of the transaction you only lock the indexes
> for the amount of time it takes to write them.
> 
> I see a 'vacuum analyze' being less of a problem than 'vacuum'.
> Any of you experts can contradict my assumptions.

The problem is that vacuum analyze does both vacuum and analyze. 
Analyze takes so long, we figured we might as well vacuum too.  Maybe we
need to change that.


-- 
  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

pgsql-ports by date

Next:From: Jackson, DeJuanDate: 1999-01-07 18:17:09
Subject: RE: [HACKERS] Re: [PORTS] vacuum takes too long
Previous:From: Jackson, DeJuanDate: 1999-01-07 17:31:56
Subject: RE: [HACKERS] Re: [PORTS] vacuum takes too long

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 1999-01-07 17:54:11
Subject: Re: [DOCS] Upcoming Attractions, web site
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 1999-01-07 17:47:34
Subject: Re: [DOCS] Upcoming Attractions, web site

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group