| From: | Csaba Nagy <nagy(at)ecircle-ag(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Ron St-Pierre <ron(dot)pgsql(at)shaw(dot)ca> |
| Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: 12 hour table vacuums |
| Date: | 2007-10-23 16:21:16 |
| Message-ID: | 1193156476.21016.55.camel@PCD12478 |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Tue, 2007-10-23 at 08:53 -0700, Ron St-Pierre wrote:
> [snip] We were running autovacuum but it interfered with
> the updates to we shut it off.
This is not directly related to your question, but it might be good for
your DB: you don't need to turn off autovacuum, you can exclude tables
individually from being autovacuumed by inserting the appropriate rows
in pg_autovacuum. See:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.1/static/catalog-pg-autovacuum.html
We also do have here a few big tables which we don't want autovacuum to
touch, so we disable them via pg_autovacuum. There are a few really big
ones which change rarely - those we only vacuum via a DB wide vacuum in
the weekend (which for us is a low activity period). If you say your
table is only changed rarely, you might be OK too with such a setup...
Cheers,
Csaba.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ron St-Pierre | 2007-10-23 16:33:16 | Re: 12 hour table vacuums |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2007-10-23 16:12:04 | Re: 12 hour table vacuums |