Re: vacuum locking

From: "scott(dot)marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com>
To: Rob Nagler <nagler(at)bivio(dot)biz>
Cc: <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: vacuum locking
Date: 2003-10-30 17:05:15
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.33.0310301004170.23412-100000@css120.ihs.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On Thu, 30 Oct 2003, Rob Nagler wrote:

> The vacuum problem is very serious for the problematic database to the
> point that one of my customer's customers said:
>
> However, I am having a hard time understanding why the system is so
> slow... from my perspective it seems like you have some fundamental
> database issues that need to be addressed.
>
> This is simply unacceptable, and that's why we're moving to Oracle.
> It's very bad for my business reputation.
>
> I don't have a ready solution to vacuuming, and none on the list have
> been effective. We'll be adding more memory, but it seems to be disk
> bandwidth problem. I run Oracle on much slower system, and I've never
> noticed problems of this kind, even when a database-wide validation is
> running. When vacuum is running, it's going through the entire
> database, and that pretty much trashes all other queries, especially
> DSS queries. As always it is just software, and there's got to be
> 80/20 solution.

Have you looked at the autovacuum daemon? Was it found wanting or what?
I've had good luck with it so far, so I was just wondering if it might
work for your needs as well. It's quite intelligent about which tables
et.al. it vacuums.

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message CLeon 2003-10-30 17:28:10 Re: [linux-lvm] RE: [PERFORM] backup/restore - another
Previous Message Rob Nagler 2003-10-30 17:04:24 Re: vacuum locking