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

Re: [Again] Postgres performance problem

From: Erik Jones <erik(at)myemma(dot)com>
To: Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [Again] Postgres performance problem
Date: 2007-09-13 16:03:20
Message-ID: 81405E66-5110-4DA8-B315-D28EA124CDB6@myemma.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
On Sep 13, 2007, at 12:58 AM, Greg Smith wrote:

> On Wed, 12 Sep 2007, Scott Marlowe wrote:
>
>> I'm getting more and more motivated to rewrite the vacuum docs.  I  
>> think a rewrite from the ground up might be best...  I keep seeing  
>> people doing vacuum full on this list and I'm thinking it's as  
>> much because of the way the docs represent vacuum full as anything.
>
> I agree you shouldn't start thinking in terms of how to fix the  
> existing documentation.  I'd suggest instead writing a tutorial  
> leading someone through what they need to know about their tables  
> first and then going into how vacuum works based on that data.
>
> As an example, people throw around terms like "index bloat" and  
> "dead tuples" when talking about vacuuming.  The tutorial I'd like  
> to see somebody write would start by explaining those terms and  
> showing how to measure them--preferably with a good and bad example  
> to contrast.  The way these terms are thrown around right now, I  
> don't expect newcomers to understand either the documentation or  
> the advice people are giving them; I think it's shooting over their  
> heads and what's needed are some walkthroughs.  Another example I'd  
> like to see thrown in there is what it looks like when you don't  
> have enough FSM slots.

Isn't that the point of the documentation?  I mean, if the existing,  
official manual has been demonstrated (through countless mailing list  
help requests) to not sufficiently explain a given topic, shouldn't  
it be revised?  One thing that might help is a hyperlinked glossary  
so that people reading through the documentation can go straight to  
the postgres definition of dead tuple, index bloat, etc.


Erik Jones

Software Developer | Emma®
erik(at)myemma(dot)com
800.595.4401 or 615.292.5888
615.292.0777 (fax)

Emma helps organizations everywhere communicate & market in style.
Visit us online at http://www.myemma.com



In response to

Responses

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Greg SmithDate: 2007-09-13 16:12:06
Subject: Re: Long Running Commits - Not Checkpoints
Previous:From: Brad NicholsonDate: 2007-09-13 15:35:59
Subject: Re: Long Running Commits - Not Checkpoints

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