From: | Mario Weilguni <mweilguni(at)sime(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Andreas Hartmann <andreas(at)apache(dot)org> |
Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Less rows -> better performance? |
Date: | 2008-07-21 15:29:14 |
Message-ID: | 4884AB4A.2020709@sime.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Andreas Hartmann schrieb:
> Mario Weilguni schrieb:
>> Andreas Hartmann schrieb:
>
> […]
>
>>> I just verified that the autovacuum property is enabled.
>
> […]
>
>> Did you have:
>> stats_start_collector = on
>> stats_block_level = on
>> stats_row_level = on
>>
>> Otherwise autovacuum won't run IMO.
>
> Thanks for the hint! The section looks like this:
>
> stats_start_collector = on
> #stats_command_string = off
> #stats_block_level = off
> stats_row_level = on
> #stats_reset_on_server_start = off
>
>
> I'll check the logs if the vacuum really runs - as soon as I find them :)
>
> -- Andreas
You might want to use these entries in your config:
redirect_stderr = on
log_directory = 'pg_log'
log_filename = 'postgresql-%Y-%m-%d_%H%M%S.log'
log_rotation_age = 1d
Fit those to your needs, then you will find log entries in $PGDATA/pg_log/
And BTW, I was wrong, you just need to have stats_row_level=On,
stats_block_level doesn't matter. But in fact it's simple, if you don't
have 24x7 requirements type VACUUM FULL ANALYZE; and check if your DB
becomes smaller, I really doubt you can have that much indizes that 27MB
dumps might use 2.3 GB on-disk.
You can check this too:
select relname, relpages, reltuples, relkind
from pg_class
where relkind in ('r', 'i')
order by relpages desc limit 20;
Will give you the top-20 tables and their sizes, 1 page is typically
8KB, so you can cross-check if relpages/reltuples is completly off, this
is a good indicator for table/index bloat.
Regards,
Mario
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Craig James | 2008-07-21 17:24:03 | Re: Perl/DBI vs Native |
Previous Message | Andreas Hartmann | 2008-07-21 15:14:27 | Re: Less rows -> better performance? |