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

Re: Pet Peeves?

From: Ron Mayer <rm_pg(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com>
To: Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: rhubbell <Rhubbell(at)iHubbell(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Pet Peeves?
Date: 2009-01-30 22:43:13
Message-ID: 49838281.7080406@cheapcomplexdevices.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general
Gregory Stark wrote:
> One thing which has *not* been mentioned which i find positively shocking is
> VACUUM. This was once our single biggest source of user complaints. Between
> Autovacuum improvements and HOT previously and the free space map in 8.4 the
> situation will be much improved.

The other 2 features that made VACUUM much less painful for me was
vacuum_cost_delay (8.0?) and allowing concurrent GiST indexes (8.1?).

Before those features were in, VACUUM could choke even a very
lightly loaded moderately large database for arbitrarily long times.



I guess I'd still like some more convenient tuning of autovacuum (perhaps
specifying X mbps disk I/O); but I'd say vacuum fell off my pet-peeve list
around the 8.1 timeframe.


In response to

Responses

pgsql-general by date

Next:From: rhubbellDate: 2009-01-30 23:44:48
Subject: Re: Pet Peeves?
Previous:From: Scott MarloweDate: 2009-01-30 22:23:01
Subject: Re: PGSQL or other DB?

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