Karl Wright wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> >Karl Wright wrote:
> >>I am afraid that I did answer this. My largest tables are the ones
> >>continually being updated. The smaller ones are updated only
> >Can you afford to vacuum them in parallel?
> Hmm, interesting question. If VACUUM is disk limited then it wouldn't
> help, probably, unless I moved various tables to different disks
> somehow. Let me think about whether that might be possible.
Well, is it disk limited? Do you have the vacuum_delay stuff enabled?
Alvaro Herrera http://www.flickr.com/photos/alvherre/
"I would rather have GNU than GNOT." (ccchips, lwn.net/Articles/37595/)
In response to
pgsql-performance by date
|Next:||From: Michael Stone||Date: 2007-06-20 18:08:55|
|Subject: Re: Performance query about large tables,
lots of concurrent access|
|Previous:||From: Karl Wright||Date: 2007-06-20 18:03:28|
|Subject: Re: Performance query about large tables, lots of concurrent