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

Re: Huge memory consumption during vacuum (v.8.0)

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Oleg Bartunov <oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su>
Cc: Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Huge memory consumption during vacuum (v.8.0)
Date: 2005-01-30 07:04:30
Message-ID: 258.1107068670@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Oleg Bartunov <oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su> writes:
> On Sun, 30 Jan 2005, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I'm confused.  The log trace you showed us before appeared to be from
>> a non-FULL vacuum, but here you're saying it's VACUUM FULL.  Which is
>> it ... or did you change?

> Yes, first time I tried vacuum from withing psql, next time I decided
> to run vacuumdb and seems changed option.

Um.  Well, a VACUUM FULL is going to build in-memory data structures
that represent *all* of the usable free space in a table.  I don't
actually think that VACUUM FULL is useful on an enormous table ... you
want to keep after it with routine plain VACUUMs, instead.

Another possibility is to use CLUSTER or a rewriting ALTER TABLE to
shrink the space, but be aware that this requires a transient second
copy of the table and indexes.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Oleg BartunovDate: 2005-01-30 07:10:34
Subject: Re: Huge memory consumption during vacuum (v.8.0)
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2005-01-30 06:58:40
Subject: Re: Allowing VACUUM to time out when waiting for locks?

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