Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 21, 2006 at 07:41:02 +0000,
> Alaa El Gohary <alaaelgohary(at)bftech(dot)com(dot)eg> wrote:
>> The following bug has been logged online:
> The report below isn't a bug, its a performance question and should have
> been sent to pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org(dot) I am redirecting replies there.
>> A query on the postgresql DB takes about 5 seconds and then it starts to
>> take more time till it reaches about 60 seconds by the end of the same day.
>> I tried vacuum but nothing changed the only thing that works is to dump the
>> DB ,drop and create a new one with the dump taken.
>> i need to know if there is any way to restore the performance back without
>> the need for drop and create
>> cause i can't do this accross the day
> You most likely aren't vacuuming often enough and/or don't have your FSM
> setting high enough.
Depending on the PostgreSQL version, it might also be that he suffers
from index bloat. He might look into the manual pages about REINDEX for
Markus Schaber | Logical Tracking&Tracing International AG
Dipl. Inf. | Software Development GIS
Fight against software patents in EU! www.ffii.org www.nosoftwarepatents.org
In response to
pgsql-performance by date
|Next:||From: Andrew Hammond||Date: 2006-07-25 20:48:28|
|Subject: Re: Partitioned tables in queries|
|Previous:||From: Robert Lor||Date: 2006-07-24 03:34:25|
|Subject: Re: Sun Donated a Sun Fire T2000 to the PostgreSQL|
pgsql-bugs by date
|Next:||From: Tino Schwarze||Date: 2006-07-24 09:56:20|
|Subject: initdb problem on Windows - SOLVED|
|Previous:||From: John Bester||Date: 2006-07-24 07:23:11|
|Subject: BUG #2547: Notifications lost when using JDBC|