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

Re: Vacuum Problems

From: "Matthew T(dot) O'Connor" <matthew(at)zeut(dot)net>
To: Rafael Domiciano <rafael(dot)domiciano(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>, Rafael Martinez <r(dot)m(dot)guerrero(at)usit(dot)uio(dot)no>, "pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Vacuum Problems
Date: 2008-11-26 19:54:05
Message-ID: 492DA95D.3010303@zeut.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-admin
Rafael Domiciano wrote:
> I'm not using autovacuum. Regular vacuum goes ok.
> To see the last 10 lines of verbose i will need to run vacuum tonight
>
> If a run a reindex before the vacuum full, increase the "speed" of 
> doing vacuum? I found something about it googling.

It might help a bit, but by the end of VACUUM FULL you would need to run 
reindex again as VACUUM FULL tends to cause a lot of index bloat.   It 
is normal for tables to have some slack space, so if you do a regular 
vacuum every day (or let autovacuum) it's normal for the table to be a 
bit bigger than after a VACUUM FULL, but they should ready steady state 
and stop growing.

You may also want to look into using CLUSTER it will rewrite the whole 
table and is typically much more efficient that VACUUM FULL, but it 
requires 2x disk space while running.

Matt


In response to

Responses

pgsql-admin by date

Next:From: Scott MarloweDate: 2008-11-26 21:04:08
Subject: Re: Vacuum Problems
Previous:From: Jan-Peter SeifertDate: 2008-11-26 18:39:18
Subject: Re: Vacuum Problems

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