| From: | Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee> |
|---|---|
| To: | mlw <markw(at)mohawksoft(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Justin Clift <justin(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at>, Vince Vielhaber <vev(at)michvhf(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: sequence indexes |
| Date: | 2002-01-29 07:34:04 |
| Message-ID: | 3C56506C.2AD21A41@tm.ee |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
mlw wrote:
>
>
> Could one run a postgresql process in a lower priority process and
> perform lazy vacuums without affecting performance all that much?
One must be very careful not to introduce reverse priority problems -
i.e. a
lower priority process locking some resource and then not letting go
while
higher priority processes are blocked from running due to needing that
lock.
In my tests 1 vacuum process slowed down 100 concurrent pgbench
processes
by ~2 times.
> A live index compaction can be done by indexing the table with a
> temporary name rename the old index, rename the new index to the old
> name, and drop the old index.
Isn't this what REINDEX command does ?
---------------
Hannu
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2002-01-29 07:42:59 | timing queries |
| Previous Message | Hiroshi Inoue | 2002-01-29 07:18:14 | Re: Improving backend launch time by preloading relcache |