> Ideally, autovacuum would only request a new copy of the file if the
> one it got was considerably out of date. Obviously a tenth of a
> second is not old enough.
I've tried to look at it and found that's already implemented - see
autovac_refresh_stats(). STATS_READ_DELAY which is set to 1s. Am I
reading the code correctly? If so then 1s is not enough for big clusters.
I guess it would be feasible to crank STATS_READ_DELAY up a little bit,
say to 10s. What do you think?
Dne 16.2.2010 19:59, Alvaro Herrera napsal(a):
> Jakub Ouhrabka wrote:
>>> Maybe you should decrease naptime a bit.
>> That did the trick, thanks!
>>> Yes. There were some changes that needed to be done to autovacuum so
>>> that it didn't read the stats file too often, but I don't recall if I
>>> got around to it.
>> I looked at the strace output and there are *writes* to the file not
>> reads. Why? Is it a consequence of this optimization?
>> Release notes 8.4:
>> Reduce I/O load of writing the statistics collection file by writing
>> the file only when requested (Martin Pihlak)
>> Was autovacuum requesting to write this 20MB file 650x per minute?
> Yes, exactly.
> Ideally, autovacuum would only request a new copy of the file if the one
> it got was considerably out of date. Obviously a tenth of a second is
> not old enough.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Magnus Hagander||Date: 2010-02-16 19:26:07|
|Subject: Re: Streaming Replication on win32|
|Previous:||From: Boszormenyi Zoltan||Date: 2010-02-16 19:01:36|
|Subject: Re: NaN/Inf fix for ECPG|