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

Re: count(*) performance

From: Gábriel Ákos <akos(dot)gabriel(at)i-logic(dot)hu>
To: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: count(*) performance
Date: 2006-03-27 18:21:57
Message-ID: 44282D45.7020008@i-logic.hu (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
Luke Lonergan wrote:
> Gabriel,
> 
> On 3/27/06 10:05 AM, "Gábriel Ákos" <akos(dot)gabriel(at)i-logic(dot)hu> wrote:
> 
>> That gave me an idea. I thought that autovacuum is doing it right, but I
>> issued a vacuum full analyze verbose , and it worked all the day.
>> After that I've tweaked memory settings a bit too (more fsm_pages)
> 
> Oops! I replied to your disk speed before I saw this.
> 
> The only thing is - you probably don't want to do a "vacuum full", but
> rather a simple "vacuum" should be enough.

I thought that too. Autovacuum is running on our system but it didn't do 
the trick. Anyway the issue is solved, thank you all for helping. :)


-- 
Üdvözlettel,
Gábriel Ákos
-=E-Mail :akos(dot)gabriel(at)i-logic(dot)hu|Web:  http://www.i-logic.hu=-
-=Tel/fax:+3612367353            |Mobil:+36209278894            =-

In response to

Responses

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: george youngDate: 2006-03-27 18:47:33
Subject: simple join uses indexes, very slow
Previous:From: Luke LonerganDate: 2006-03-27 18:14:45
Subject: Re: count(*) performance

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