Re: VACUUMs take twice as long across all nodes

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Gavin Hamill <gdh(at)laterooms(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: VACUUMs take twice as long across all nodes
Date: 2006-10-26 14:47:21
Message-ID: 20196.1161874041@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Gavin Hamill <gdh(at)laterooms(dot)com> writes:
> Nodes 2 and 3 take only the tables necessary to run our search (10 out
> of the full 130) and are much lighter (only 7GB on disk cf. 30GB for
> the full master) , yet the nightly VACUUM FULL has jumped from 2 hours
> to 4 in the space of one day!

I guess the most useful question to ask is "why are you doing VACUUM FULL?"
Plain VACUUM should be considerably faster, and for the level of row
turnover shown by your log, there doesn't seem to be a reason to use FULL.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Carlo Stonebanks 2006-10-26 14:48:00 Re: commit so slow program looks frozen
Previous Message Carlo Stonebanks 2006-10-26 14:43:50 Re: commit so slow program looks frozen