Re: Vacuum, Freeze and Analyze: the big picture

On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 5:03 AM, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:

> On 06/02/2013 05:56 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>

> > (b) users
> > making ridiculous settings changes to avoid the problems caused by
> > anti-wraparound vacuums kicking in at inconvenient times and eating up
> > too many resources.
>
> Some recent experiences I've had have also bought home to me that vacuum
> problems are often of the user's own making.
>
> "My database is slow"
> ->
> "This autovacuum thing is using up lots of I/O and CPU, I'll increase
> this delay setting here"
>

Do you think this was the correct diagnosis but with the wrong action
taken, or was the diagnosis incorrect in the first place (i.e. it may be
using some IO and CPU, but that isn't what was causing the initial
problem)? And if the diagnosis was correct, was it causing problems under
default settings, or only because they already turned off the cost delay?

Cheers,

Jeff