Re: Postgresql Automatic vacuum

From: John Buckman <john(at)lyris(dot)com>
To: <shridhar_daithankar(at)persistent(dot)co(dot)in>, <matthew(at)zeut(dot)net>
Cc: <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Postgresql Automatic vacuum
Date: 2002-09-25 01:12:18
Message-ID: 200209250112.SAA11771@luna.lyris.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> As far as getting into base postgresql distro. I don't mind it rewriting but I
> have some reservations.
> 1) As it is postgresql source code is huge. Adding functions to it which
> directly taps into it's nervous system e.g. cache, would take far more time to
> perfect in all conditions.

It doesn't have to make its way into the postgresql daemon itself -- in fact since some people like tuning the vacuuming, it makes more sense to make this a daemon. No, my suggestion is simple that some sort of auto-vacuumer be compiled as a stand-alone app and included in the standard postgresql tar.gz file, and the install instructions recommend the site adding it as a cron job.

On linux, it'd be good if the RPM install it automatically (or else it ran as a mostly-asleep daemon) because so many of the Linux/Postgresql users we see have just no clue about Postgresql, and no intention of reading anything.

Just an FYI, a message I received today from the postmaster at a major telco about their postgresql experience:
> We have experienced some problems but they have generally
> cleared up after a database vacuum. However, sometimes I
> have found that the vacuum itself (especially a vacuum analyze)
> will go into the CPU consumption loop.

-john

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message jra 2002-09-25 02:14:40 Re: PGXLOG variable worthwhile?
Previous Message Curt Sampson 2002-09-25 01:07:43 Re: PGXLOG variable worthwhile?