From: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Phoenix Kiula <phoenix(dot)kiula(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Postgresql performance in production environment |
Date: | 2007-08-19 12:37:00 |
Message-ID: | 46C8396C.9080505@hagander.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Phoenix Kiula wrote:
> On 19/08/07, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
>> Phoenix Kiula wrote:
>>> On 19/08/07, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
>
>
>>> should we do one (VACUUM FULL) now given that we've overrun our max_fsm_pages?
>> Yes, but not until you've fixed it. And only once.
>>
>
>
>
> FIxed what - the max_fsm_pages? That was my question: how to know what
> value to set for this. If the "vacuum verbose" won't give me the info
> you suggested because it is likely overlapping with autovacuum, should
> I temporarily turn autovacuum off and then run vacuum verbose? Also,
> while running vacuum full, any precautions to take?
Yeah, you can do that - or you can just trawl back through the logs to
find that information - it's there somewhere. grep would be helpful to
find it.
vacuum full will take out blocking locks on your database, so run it
during a maintenance window or at least during a low-traffic time.
//Magnus
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Henrik | 2007-08-19 13:26:50 | Re: query large amount of data in c++ using libpq |
Previous Message | Bill Moran | 2007-08-19 12:23:49 | Re: Seeking datacenter PITR backup procedures [RESENDING] |