| From: | "Matthew T(dot) O'Connor" <matthew(at)zeut(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jeremy Harris <jgh(at)wizmail(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Chander Ganesan <chander(at)otg-nc(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: enabling autovacuum |
| Date: | 2008-01-31 01:56:39 |
| Message-ID: | 47A12AD7.7090004@zeut.net |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Jeremy Harris wrote:
> Chander Ganesan wrote:
>> Inserts don't generate dead tuples, and AVD looks at obsolete
>> tuples.. As such, I wouldn't expect AVD to kick off until after you
>> did a mass delete...assuming that delete was sizable enough to
>> trigger a vacuum.
>
> Ah, that would explain it - thankyou. So I need to retreat to
> the question of why the weekly vacuum permits the observed bloat.
> Any ideas? More information that I could gather?
Autovacuum will kick off an analyze if you do enough inserts however.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ow Mun Heng | 2008-01-31 02:11:19 | Re: postgresql book - practical or something newer? |
| Previous Message | Swaminathan Saikumar | 2008-01-31 01:12:27 | Re: Is PostGreSql's Data storage mechanism "inferior"? |