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

Re: VACUUMs take twice as long across all nodes

From: Andrew Sullivan <ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca>
To: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: VACUUMs take twice as long across all nodes
Date: 2006-10-26 22:09:37
Message-ID: 20061026220937.GA6866@phlogiston.dyndns.org (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
On Thu, Oct 26, 2006 at 09:35:56PM +0100, Gavin Hamill wrote:
> 
> I'm absolutely certain. The backups run from only one slave, given that
> it is a full copy of node 1. Our overnight traffic has not increased
> any, and the nightly backups show that the overall size of the DB has
> not increased more than usual growth.

A couple things from your posts:

1.	Don't do VACUUM FULL, please.  It takes longer, and blocks
other things while it's going on, which might mean you're having
table bloat in various slony-related tables.

2.	Are your slony logs showing increased time too?  Are your
targets getting further behind?

3.	Your backups "from the slave" aren't done with pg_dump,
right?

But I suspect Slony has a role here, too.  I'd look carefully at the
slony tables -- especially the sl_log and pg_listen things, which
both are implicated.

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan  | ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca
"The year's penultimate month" is not in truth a good way of saying
November.
		--H.W. Fowler

In response to

Responses

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Jim C. NasbyDate: 2006-10-26 22:36:50
Subject: Re: query slows down drastically with increased number of fields
Previous:From: George PavlovDate: 2006-10-26 22:03:38
Subject: Re: query slows down drastically with increased number of fields

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