| From: | Shaun Thomas <sthomas(at)optionshouse(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alban Hertroys <haramrae(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)mail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Unexplained Major Vacuum Archive Activity During Vacuum |
| Date: | 2012-11-01 16:44:25 |
| Message-ID: | 5092A6E9.6000609@optionshouse.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 11/01/2012 11:40 AM, Alban Hertroys wrote:
> Instead of attempting to postpone freeze until beyond the life
> expectancy of our universe, what you probably should have done is
> vacuum more often so that vacuum has less work to do.
More often than every night, with autovacuum running in the background
to get regular stuff that happens during the day? 650M transactions is 3
or 4 days for us. That's hardly the lifetime of the universe. And since
I didn't modify vacuum_freeze_table_age, any table vacuumed after 150M
transactions is given a vacuum freeze anyway. No harm done.
It's my understanding you *don't* want to freeze excessively. I think
once every day is bad enough, honestly.
--
Shaun Thomas
OptionsHouse | 141 W. Jackson Blvd. | Suite 500 | Chicago IL, 60604
312-444-8534
sthomas(at)optionshouse(dot)com
______________________________________________
See http://www.peak6.com/email_disclaimer/ for terms and conditions related to this email
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Daniel Popowich | 2012-11-01 18:28:22 | Using PostgreSQL for NSS databases |
| Previous Message | Alban Hertroys | 2012-11-01 16:40:23 | Re: Unexplained Major Vacuum Archive Activity During Vacuum |