From: | "scott(dot)marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Jeff Boes <jboes(at)qtm(dot)net> |
Cc: | <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Disk Utilization Increases And Time for Vacuum Increases. |
Date: | 2003-08-25 19:14:38 |
Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.33.0308251313400.29716-100000@css120.ihs.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin |
On Mon, 25 Aug 2003, Jeff Boes wrote:
> >One action we have consiously not done is "REINDEX" on the
> >table. We want to avoid that as far as possible.
>
> Why? It's usually a very painless step, unless the table has millions and
> millions of rows. We reindex tables with multiple indexes and several million
> rows on a weekly basis. The only downside is that the table seems to be quite
> "busy" during the process, which only takes a few minutes.
>
> AFAIK, VACUUM doesn't reclaim space taken up by indexes. In fact, the more
> deletes you do, the larger the index space gets, and the *slower* the index
> performs. A periodic REINDEX cleans up a lot of problems.
Note that in 7.4 the fix for this is in, so if you have a chance to test
it out with your indexes and their growth problem please test it to see if
it works right.
I haven't tested 7.4 beta1 yet very hard, just on my workstation, with
relatively low level stuff.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2003-08-25 21:07:50 | Re: pg_ctl won't start postgres, but postmaster will?! |
Previous Message | Jesse Burkhardt | 2003-08-25 19:07:09 | Re: Automated backup problems - pg_dump |