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

Re: VACUUM FULL out of memory

From: Michael Akinde <michael(dot)akinde(at)met(dot)no>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: VACUUM FULL out of memory
Date: 2008-01-07 15:42:24
Message-ID: 47824860.9030003@met.no (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Hi,

The system we are building is intended to be utilized in a number of 
different applications, so the testing we are doing is primarily 
directed at stressing the system by running it through its paces and 
uncovering any weaknesses. I prefer to find as many problems as possible 
now, rather than in production. ;-)

For the current application set I'm testing, I expect we won't need to 
do much VACUUMing, as it will be a fairly static dataset only used for 
querying (once all the data is loaded). I know that we will be running 
some databases with some pretty rapid throughput (100 GB/day), but if 
VACUUM will do (as I expect), then we'll probably just stick to that. I 
don't have time to do any testing on that until next month, though.

I do find it odd, however, that pgsql recommends using a VACUUM FULL (as 
a result of running the VACUUM). Especially if, as it seems, VACUUM FULL 
doesn't work for tables beyond a certain size. Assuming we have not set 
up something completely wrongly, this seems like a bug.

If this is the wrong mailing list to be posting this, then please let me 
know.

Regards,

Michael Akinde
Database Architect, Met.no

Usama Dar wrote:
> On Jan 7, 2008 2:40 PM, Michael Akinde <michael(dot)akinde(at)met(dot)no 
> <mailto:michael(dot)akinde(at)met(dot)no>> wrote:
>
>     As suggested, I tested a VACUUM FULL ANALYZE with 128MB shared_buffers
>     and 512 MB reserved for maintenance_work_mem (on a 32 bit machine
>     with 4
>     GB RAM). 
>
>
> My Apologies if  my question seems redundant and something you have 
> already discussed with list members, but why do you need to do a 
> VACUUM FULL? have you not vacuumed for a while? or some special 
> requirement which requires very aggressive space re-claim? Vacuum Full 
> is also known to cause some index bloat at times as well. most systems 
> i know run regular vacuums and had never required to run a vacuum full.
>
>
>
> -- 
> Usama Munir Dar http://www.linkedin.com/in/usamadar
> Consultant Architect
> Cell:+92 321 5020666
> Skype: usamadar


Attachment: michael.akinde.vcf
Description: text/x-vcard (287 bytes)

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Andrew SullivanDate: 2008-01-07 15:57:53
Subject: Re: VACUUM FULL out of memory
Previous:From: Andrew SullivanDate: 2008-01-07 15:41:46
Subject: Re: Dynamic Partitioning using Segment Visibility Maps

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