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

Re: Vacuum looping?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Steven Flatt" <steven(dot)flatt(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Vacuum looping?
Date: 2007-07-28 14:37:07
Message-ID: 8112.1185633427@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
"Steven Flatt" <steven(dot)flatt(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> The vacuum then just sat there.  What I can't understand is why it went back
> for a second pass of the pkey index?  There was nothing writing to the table
> once the vacuum began.  Is this behaviour expected?

Yes (hint: the numbers tell me what your maintenance_work_mem setting is).
You should have left it alone, probably, though there seems to be
something funny about your foo_1 index --- why was that so much slower
than the others for the first pass?

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Jim C. NasbyDate: 2007-07-28 16:36:24
Subject: Re: Vacuum looping?
Previous:From: Tilmann SingerDate: 2007-07-28 12:52:36
Subject: Re: Slow query with backwards index scan

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