| From: | "Francisco Reyes" <lists(at)natserv(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "neilc(at)samurai(dot)com" <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Size for vacuum_mem |
| Date: | 2002-12-05 17:33:54 |
| Message-ID: | 200212051731.gB5HV8o14921@mx2.drf.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 4 Dec 2002, Neil Conway wrote:
> > Currently a vacuum full takes 3+ hours and very soon the amount of data
> > will increase.
>
> Do you need to use VACUUM FULL?
I have a very large turnover ratio.
For some tables I delete/reload the whole table daily (tables in the 500K
to 1.5 Million records), while other tables I delete/reload about 1/3 (ie
7 Million records table I delete/copy 1.5 Million records).
The reason for the delete/copy is that the data is coming from a system
where there is now way to tell what was added, changed since the last
update. So I use date ranges for some tables and do entire tables for
others.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-12-05 17:36:31 | Re: passwords in pg_shadow (duplicate). |
| Previous Message | Bruno Wolff III | 2002-12-05 17:25:24 | Re: 7.3 no longer using indexes for LIKE queries |