Re: autovacuum

From: "Matthew T(dot) O'Connor" <matthew(at)zeut(dot)net>
To: Noah Freire <noah(dot)freire(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: autovacuum
Date: 2008-10-30 23:53:28
Message-ID: 490A48F8.1030607@zeut.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Noah Freire wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 4:46 PM, Matthew T. O'Connor <matthew(at)zeut(dot)net
> <mailto:matthew(at)zeut(dot)net>> wrote:
>
>
> Is the table being excluded? (see the pg_autovacuum system table
> settings)
>
>
> there's an entry for this table on pg_autovacuum, and it's enabled.
>
>
> Are you sure that it's not getting processed? Perhaps one worker
> is / has been churning on this table for a *LONG* time (that is a
> fairly big table).
>
>
> Right. I was wrong :-) the table is being processed by autovacuum (I
> checked via pg_stat_activity). However, as you pinpointed, it's
> already running for hours (the test workload ended hours ago,
> basically it is just this autovacuum worker running on the system).
>
> Is there a way to make a more aggressive autovacuum setting for this
> table? it does not matter if it will affect performance, my concern is
> that it finishes as soon as possible. I wonder if a manual vacuum
> wouldn't be faster.

Yes, in the pg_autovacuum table, you can set per-relation vacuum cost
delay settings etc...

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Noah Freire 2008-10-30 23:59:28 Re: autovacuum
Previous Message Noah Freire 2008-10-30 23:29:29 Re: autovacuum