| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Ron St-Pierre <ron(dot)pgsql(at)shaw(dot)ca> |
| Cc: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: 12 hour table vacuums |
| Date: | 2007-10-23 18:23:18 |
| Message-ID: | 20071023182318.GN18013@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Ron St-Pierre wrote:
> Gregory Stark wrote:
>>> We were running autovacuum but it interfered with the updates to we
>>> shut it off.
>>
>> Was it just the I/O bandwidth? I'm surprised as your
>> vacuum_cost_delay is quite high. Manual vacuum doesn't do anything
>> differently from autovacuum, neither should interfere directly with
>> updates except by taking away I/O bandwidth.
>>
> I don't know what the problem was. I tried to exclude certain tables
> from autovacuuming, but it autovacuumed anyway.
Probably because of Xid wraparound issues. Now that you're vacuuming
weekly it shouldn't be a problem. (It's also much less of a problem in
8.2).
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Harald Fuchs | 2007-10-24 09:04:27 | Re: 12 hour table vacuums |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2007-10-23 18:22:02 | Re: 12 hour table vacuums |