| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | ogjunk-pgjedan(at)yahoo(dot)com |
| Cc: | pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: VACUUMing for 30 minutes |
| Date: | 2004-12-22 16:14:36 |
| Message-ID: | 4284.1103732076@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin |
<ogjunk-pgjedan(at)yahoo(dot)com> writes:
> VACUUMing this DB takes about 30 minutes, and during that time the DB
> is pretty unresponsive, although the PG process is not using a lot of
> CPU (load ~ 1) nor memory (~20MB for the VACUUM process).
How big is the DB physically ("du $PGDATA" results)? If you've been lax
about vacuuming or not had your FSM parameters set high enough, there
could be a whole lot of dead space for VACUUM to scan through. If so,
VACUUM FULL or possibly CLUSTER would be the best way to re-compact the
tables. (VACUUM VERBOSE on your larger tables would be another way to
investigate this.)
The other possibility is that you have a seriously slow disk drive :-(
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | ogjunk-pgjedan | 2004-12-22 16:38:43 | Re: VACUUMing for 30 minutes |
| Previous Message | Vinita.Bansal | 2004-12-22 13:25:29 | default index for primary key of a table |