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

Re: VACUUMing for 30 minutes

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 (view raw or flat)
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

In response to

Responses

pgsql-admin by date

Next:From: ogjunk-pgjedanDate: 2004-12-22 16:38:43
Subject: Re: VACUUMing for 30 minutes
Previous:From: Vinita.BansalDate: 2004-12-22 13:25:29
Subject: default index for primary key of a table

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