Re: 3-days-long vacuum of 20GB table

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Jeffrey Baker" <jwbaker(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: 3-days-long vacuum of 20GB table
Date: 2008-04-18 19:09:08
Message-ID: 6256.1208545748@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

"Jeffrey Baker" <jwbaker(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> I increased it to 1GB, restarted the vacuum, and system performance
> seems the same. The root of the problem, that an entire CPU is in the
> iowait state and the storage device is doing random i/o, is unchanged:

Yeah, but you just reduced the number of index scans that will be needed
by a factor of 1GB/16MB. Hang in there ...

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jesper Krogh 2008-04-18 19:23:09 Re: Message queue table..
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2008-04-18 18:24:22 Re: 3-days-long vacuum of 20GB table