| From: | Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Rick <richard(dot)branton(at)ca(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: autovacuum strategy / parameters |
| Date: | 2010-05-01 16:13:25 |
| Message-ID: | y2gdcc563d11005010913w3a24a73dl9e6c5e0ae174f730@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 4:50 PM, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:
> Which is the opposite of my experience; currently we have several
> clients who have issues which required more-frequent analyzes on
> specific tables. Before 8.4, vacuuming more frequently, especially on
> large tables, was very costly; vacuum takes a lot of I/O and CPU. Even
> with 8.4 it's not something you want to increase without thinking about
> the tradeoff
Actually I would think that statement would be be that before 8.3
vacuum was much more expensive. The changes to vacuum for 8.4 mostly
had to do with moving FSM to disk, making seldom vacuumed tables
easier to keep track of, and making autovac work better in the
presence of long running transactions. The ability to tune IO load
etc was basically unchanged in 8.4.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Greg Smith | 2010-05-01 17:11:05 | Re: autovacuum strategy / parameters |
| Previous Message | Scott Marlowe | 2010-05-01 16:08:36 | Re: autovacuum strategy / parameters |