Re: Postgres 7.4 and vacuum_cost_delay.

From: Andrew Sullivan <ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca>
To: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Postgres 7.4 and vacuum_cost_delay.
Date: 2006-05-04 12:27:47
Message-ID: 20060504122747.GA21437@phlogiston.dyndns.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On Tue, May 02, 2006 at 05:47:15PM -0400, Chris Mckenzie wrote:
> I've come to the conclusion I need to simply start tracking all transactions
> and determining a cost/performance for the larger and frequently updated
> tables without the benefit and penalty of pg_statio.

I'll bet it won't help you. If you can't get off 7.4 on a busy
machine, you're going to get hosed by I/O sometimes no matter what.
My suggestion is to write a bunch of rule-of-thumb rules for your
cron jobs, and start planning your upgrade.

Jan back-patched the vacuum stuff to 7.4 for us (Afilias), and we
tried playing with it; but it didn't really make the difference we'd
hoped.

The reason for this is that 7.4 also doesn't have the bg_writer. So
you're still faced with I/O storms, no matter what you do. If I were
in your shoes, I wouldn't waste a lot of time on trying to emulate
the new features in 7.4.

A

--
Andrew Sullivan | ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca
In the future this spectacle of the middle classes shocking the avant-
garde will probably become the textbook definition of Postmodernism.
--Brad Holland

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Mario Splivalo 2006-05-04 14:15:13 Re: Lot'sa joins - performance tip-up, please?
Previous Message Michael Stone 2006-05-03 22:00:30 Re: Slow restoration question