| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dimitri <dimitrik(dot)fr(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Parallel Vacuum |
| Date: | 2007-03-22 15:12:50 |
| Message-ID: | 20070322151243.GH4102@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Dimitri escribió:
> On Thursday 22 March 2007 14:52, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > Dimitri escribió:
> > > Folks,
> > >
> > > is there any constrains/problems/etc. to run several vacuum processes in
> > > parallel while each one is 'vaccuming' one different table?
> >
> > No, no problem. Keep in mind that if one of them takes a very long
> > time, the others will not be able to remove dead tuples that were
> > killed while the long vacuum was running -- unless you are in 8.2.
>
> Yes, I'm using the last 8.2.3 version. So, will they *really* processing in
> parallel, or will block each other step by step?
They won't block.
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Craig A. James | 2007-03-22 15:16:51 | Re: Performance of count(*) |
| Previous Message | Dimitri | 2007-03-22 15:05:37 | Re: Parallel Vacuum |