| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Ole Streicher" <ole-usenet-spam(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Cleaning up large objects |
| Date: | 2004-08-11 14:18:51 |
| Message-ID: | 4987.1092233931@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-jdbc |
"Ole Streicher" <ole-usenet-spam(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> What is a reasonable value for these settings in my case?
I'd try bumping up max_fsm_pages to a million or so. That would
definitely be enough for a 10Gb database. You could probably get
away with less but I'm not sure it's worth worrying about.
If you are running 7.4 then a "vacuum verbose" will give you some
data (at the very end of its lengthy printout) about FSM consumption,
which you could use if you want to size more carefully.
> Is it possible to run the vacuum with a lower priority (while all other
> postgres queries keeping the normal priority)?
No. In 8.0 there will be some tuning parameters that will help with
that, but not in current releases...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Elie Nacache | 2004-08-11 14:53:10 | Re: [GENERAL] Resultset problem or BUG ! |
| Previous Message | Dave Cramer | 2004-08-11 13:30:18 | Re: Large Tables |