| From: | Clarence Gardner <clarence(at)silcom(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Oleg Lebedev <oleg(dot)lebedev(at)waterford(dot)org>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: slow query |
| Date: | 2003-02-24 17:27:56 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.44.0302240925360.25665-100000@liberty.sba2.netlojix.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On 24 Feb 2003, Robert Treat wrote:
>
> If your seeing wildly dramatic improvments from vacuum full, you might
> want to look into running regular vacuums more often (especially for
> high turnover tables), increase your max_fsm_relations to 1000, and
> increasing your max_fsm_pages.
I don't know about the settings you mention, but a frequent vacuum
does not at all obviate a vacuum full. My database is vacuumed every
night, but a while ago I found that a vacuum full changed a simple
single-table query from well over 30 seconds to one or two. We now
do a vacuum full every night.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Oleg Lebedev | 2003-02-24 17:44:57 | Re: slow query |
| Previous Message | Oleg Lebedev | 2003-02-24 17:07:03 | Re: slow query |