Re: Postgresql 'eats' all mi data partition

From: Tomas Szepe <szepe(at)pinerecords(dot)com>
To: Gaetano Mendola <mendola(at)bigfoot(dot)com>
Cc: "pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Postgresql 'eats' all mi data partition
Date: 2003-09-27 10:57:40
Message-ID: 20030927105740.GB32507@louise.pinerecords.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

> [mendola(at)bigfoot(dot)com]
>
> Tomas Szepe wrote:
> >>[tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us]
> >>
> >>
> >>>indexes:
> >>>stats_min_pkey primary key btree (ip, "start")
> >>>stats_min_start btree ("start")
> >>>stats_hr_pkey primary key btree (ip, "start")
> >>>stats_hr_start btree ("start")
> >>
> >>>ip is of type "inet" in all tables.
> >>>start is of type "timestamp without time zone" in all tables.
> >>
> >>Okay, so a pkey index entry will take 32 bytes counting overhead ...
> >>you've got about 10:1 bloat on the stats_min indexes and 2:1 in stats_hr.
> >>Definitely bad :-(
> >
> >
> >The only difference between the way stats_min and stats_hr are updated
> >stems from the fact that stats_min only holds records for the last 1440
> >minutes (because of its killer time granularity), whereas stats_hr
> >holds its data until we decide some of it is obsolete enough and
> >issue a "delete from" by hand.
>
> Are you sure that all indexes are needed and that a partial index could
> not help ? What about the statistics on these indexes ? Are they really
> used ?

Yup, they're all essential. :(

--
Tomas Szepe <szepe(at)pinerecords(dot)com>

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Gaetano Mendola 2003-09-27 11:20:25 Re: Postgresql 'eats' all mi data partition
Previous Message Gaetano Mendola 2003-09-27 09:24:50 Re: Postgresql 'eats' all mi data partition