From: | Richard Neill <rn214(at)hermes(dot)cam(dot)ac(dot)uk> |
---|---|
To: | Matthew Wakeling <matthew(at)flymine(dot)org> |
Cc: | Richard Neill <rn214(at)cam(dot)ac(dot)uk>, PostgreSQL Performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Query times change by orders of magnitude as DB ages |
Date: | 2009-11-25 12:10:42 |
Message-ID: | 4B0D1EC2.9050203@hermes.cam.ac.uk |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Matthew Wakeling wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Nov 2009, Richard Neill wrote:
>> Worse still, doing a cluster of most of the tables and vacuum full
>> analyze
>
> Why are you doing a vacuum full? That command is not meant to be used
> except in the most unusual of circumstances, as it causes bloat to indexes.
We'd left it too long, and the DB was reaching 90% of disk space. I
didn't realise that vacuum full was ever actively bad, only sometimes
unneeded. I do now - thanks for the tip.
>
> If you have run a cluster command, then running vacuum full will make
> the table and index layout worse, not better.
>
So, having managed to bloat the indexes in this way, what can I do to
fix it? Will a regular vacuum do the job?
Richard
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Richard Neill | 2009-11-25 12:11:09 | Re: Query times change by orders of magnitude as DB ages |
Previous Message | Glyn Astill | 2009-11-25 11:09:32 | Re: RAID card recommendation |