Re: Visibility map, partial vacuums

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: Visibility map, partial vacuums
Date: 2009-01-15 15:52:47
Message-ID: 200901151552.n0FFql905542@momjian.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Gregory Stark wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
>
> > Would someone tell me why 'autovacuum_freeze_max_age' defaults to 200M
> > when our wraparound limit is around 2B?
>
> I suggested raising it dramatically in the post you quote and Heikki pointed
> it controls the maximum amount of space the clog will take. Raising it to,
> say, 800M will mean up to 200MB of space which might be kind of annoying for a
> small database.
>
> It would be nice if we could ensure the clog got trimmed frequently enough on
> small databases that we could raise the max_age. It's really annoying to see
> all these vacuums running 10x more often than necessary.

I always assumed that it was our 4-byte xid that was requiring our
vacuum freeze, but I now see our limiting factor is the size of clog;
interesting.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Heikki Linnakangas 2009-01-15 15:57:09 Re: Visibility map, partial vacuums
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2009-01-15 15:51:35 Re: FWD: Re: Updated backslash consistency patch