thing(at)m-bass(dot)com (Markus Benne) writes:
> We have a highly active table that has virtually all
> entries updated every 5 minutes. Typical size of the
> table is 50,000 entries, and entries have grown fat.
> We are currently vaccuming hourly, and towards the end
> of the hour we are seeing degradation, when compared
> to the top of the hour.
You're not vacuuming the table nearly often enough.
You should vacuum this table every five minutes, and possibly more
often than that.
[We have some tables like that, albeit smaller than 50K entries, which
we vacuum once per minute in production...]
> We are thinking of splitting the table in two: the part the updates
> often, and the part the updates infrequently as we suspect that
> record size impacts vacuum.
There's *some* merit to that.
You might discover that there's a "hot spot" that needs to be vacuumed
once per minute.
But it may be simpler to just hit the table with a vacuum once every
few minutes even though some tuples are seldom updated.
output = reverse("gro.gultn" "@" "enworbbc")
Signs of a Klingon Programmer #3: "By filing this TPR you have
challenged the honor of my family. Prepare to die!"
In response to
pgsql-performance by date
|Next:||From: Ralph Mason||Date: 2005-08-30 22:21:20|
|Subject: 'Real' auto vacuum?|
|Previous:||From: mark||Date: 2005-08-30 22:05:03|
|Subject: Re: When to do a vacuum for highly active table|