| From: | "Matthew T(dot) O'Connor" <matthew(at)zeut(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Chris Hoover <revoohc(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org Admin" <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: More Autovacuum questions |
| Date: | 2008-07-16 05:27:24 |
| Message-ID: | 487D86BC.4020607@zeut.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin |
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Matthew T. O'Connor escribió:
>
>> As Alvaro already said this is a case where autovacuum still isn't
>> great.
>>
>
> While I have your attention ;-) do you have any ideas on how to improve
> this? I don't see anything that looks like a solution for this case.
No good ideas, but a few random thoughts.
1) Can we make vacuum not block analyze? That way we can continue to
analyze a table while it's being vacuumed.
1b) If not, can we make auto-analyze bump auto-vacuum?
2) Maintenance windows. They wouldn't solve this problem, but they
might mitigate it some.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Sullivan | 2008-07-16 14:15:29 | Re: Backup and failover process |
| Previous Message | Decibel! | 2008-07-16 03:07:59 | Re: Rewrite SELECT WHERE clause on per-session bases. Modifing view source code in one session (user's) from another session (admin's)? |