| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stefano Nichele <stefano(dot)nichele(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: strange autovacuum behaviour |
| Date: | 2009-02-10 14:07:42 |
| Message-ID: | 20090210140742.GG3708@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin |
Stefano Nichele escribió:
> Hi All,
> I have a couple of questions about autovacuum/vacuum behavior.
>
> On my production system, I set autovacuum ON since it's pretty hard to
> me find a good timeframe for vacuum (the system is pretty busy over the day)
> Last week the system was really slow and running vacuum manually the
> performance was really improved.
> So now I would like to understand why autovacuum did not work as
> expected (at least for me). Any ideas ?
Maybe the autovacuum naptime was set too high. Or perhaps the threshold
and scale settings were too high. Maybe the vacuum_cost_delay for
autovacuum was too high.
> Why autovacuum (that was OFF) started ? For preventing transaction ID
> wraparound ? Is it right that in such case all the tables are
> (auto)vacuumed ?
Not necessarily all tables; only those that require a vacuum to prevent
xid wraparound. (It was all tables in 8.1, but this changed in 8.2).
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Carol Walter | 2009-02-11 15:11:14 | Re: User defined functions... - Found to be tsearch |
| Previous Message | John Lister | 2009-02-10 07:58:03 | Re: database corruption help |