Re: Performance query about large tables, lots of concurrent access

From: Karl Wright <kwright(at)metacarta(dot)com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: Francisco Reyes <lists(at)stringsutils(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Performance query about large tables, lots of concurrent access
Date: 2007-06-20 17:55:20
Message-ID: 46796A08.8080601@metacarta.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Karl Wright wrote:
>
>> (b) the performance of individual queries had already degraded
>> significantly in the same manner as what I'd seen before.
>
> You didn't answer whether you had smaller, more frequently updated
> tables that need more vacuuming. This comment makes me think you do. I
> think what you should be looking at is whether you can forget vacuuming
> the whole database in one go, and make it more granular.
>

I am afraid that I did answer this. My largest tables are the ones
continually being updated. The smaller ones are updated only infrequently.

Karl

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Anastasios Hatzis 2007-06-20 17:57:58 Re: On managerial choosing (was: Postgres VS Oracle)
Previous Message Oleg Bartunov 2007-06-20 17:54:03 Re: Slow indexscan