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
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 |