Re: [PATCHES] smartvacuum() instead of autovacuum

From: "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jim(at)nasby(dot)net>
To: Hitoshi Harada <hitoshi_harada(at)forcia(dot)com>
Cc: 'Tom Lane' <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, 'Peter Eisentraut' <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] smartvacuum() instead of autovacuum
Date: 2006-10-23 18:36:28
Message-ID: 20061023183628.GR26892@nasby.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

If the decision to vacuum based on autovacuum criteria is good enough
for you then I think you should just focus on getting autovac to do what
you want it to do. Perhaps you just need to decrease the sleep time to a
few seconds, so that autovac will quickly detect when something needs to
be vacuumed.

The only case I can think of where autovac might not work as well as
smartvacuum would be if you had a lot of databases in the cluster, since
autovacuum will only vacuum one database at a time.

On Mon, Oct 23, 2006 at 11:18:39AM +0900, Hitoshi Harada wrote:
> Ok,
>
> But my point is, autovacuum may corrupt with vacuum analyze command
> on another session. My intention of smartvacuum() is based on this.
> Any solution for this??
>
> Regards,
>
>
> Hitoshi Harada
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: pgsql-hackers-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org
> > [mailto:pgsql-hackers-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org] On Behalf Of Tom Lane
> > Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 11:10 AM
> > To: Hitoshi Harada
> > Cc: 'Peter Eisentraut'; pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
> > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] smartvacuum() instead of autovacuum
> >
> > "Hitoshi Harada" <hitoshi_harada(at)forcia(dot)com> writes:
> > >> How is this different from what autovacuum does?
> >
> > > My application needs to do vacuum by itself, while
> > > autovacuum does it as daemon.
> > > The database is updated so frequently that
> > > normal vacuum costs too much and tables to be updated are
> > > not so many as the whole database is vacuumed.
> > > I want to use autovacuum except the feature of daemon,
> > > but want to control when to vacuum and which table to vacuum.
> > > So, nothing is different between autovacuum and smartvacuum(),
> > > but former is daemon and later is user function.
> >
> > This seems completely unconvincing. What are you going to do that
> > couldn't be done by autovacuum?
> >
> > regards, tom lane
> >
> > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> > TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
>

--
Jim Nasby jim(at)nasby(dot)net
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell)

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message richard 2006-10-23 18:36:59 Tsearch2 index size
Previous Message luis garcia 2006-10-23 18:32:47 Problems starting Template1...

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Brant 2006-10-23 18:59:39 Re: BUG #2712: could not fsync segment: Permission
Previous Message Thomas H. 2006-10-23 18:00:11 Re: BUG #2712: could not fsync segment: Permission