From: | "Scott Marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
Cc: | "Tena Sakai" <tsakai(at)gallo(dot)ucsf(dot)edu>, pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: postgres bogged down beyond tolerance |
Date: | 2007-11-14 21:46:00 |
Message-ID: | dcc563d10711141346u2037c75dnbb389ef08a8622b9@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin |
On Nov 14, 2007 3:33 PM, Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 3:16 PM, in message
> <dcc563d10711141316u53338170l5d31d7723c8dc30b(at)mail(dot)gmail(dot)com>, "Scott Marlowe"
> <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> > On Nov 14, 2007 2:26 PM, Tena Sakai <tsakai(at)gallo(dot)ucsf(dot)edu> wrote:
> >> INFO: vacuuming "public.allele"
> >> INFO: "allele": found 2518282 removable, 1257262 nonremovable row versions
> >> in 31511 pages
>
> >> Total free space (including removable row versions) is 161940948 bytes.
>
> > It looks to me like your tables were bloated. After running vacuum
> > full your cron should run faster now.
>
> Isn't it usually a good idea to REINDEX after using VACUUM FULL to
> recover from this level of bloat?
Depends on your indexes. These didn't look bloated to me, but that
wasn't the whole output of vacuum full either. Yes, reindex is a good
idea after a vacuum full though.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Cristiano Marques | 2007-11-14 22:08:13 | help to Brazil |
Previous Message | Kevin Grittner | 2007-11-14 21:33:09 | Re: postgres bogged down beyond tolerance |