Re: new to postgres (and db management) and performance already a problem :-(

From: Antoine <melser(dot)anton(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "me(at)alternize(dot)com" <me(at)alternize(dot)com>
Cc: Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: new to postgres (and db management) and performance already a problem :-(
Date: 2006-01-17 08:14:27
Message-ID: 92d3a4950601170014m352c75bes@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On 17/01/06, me(at)alternize(dot)com <me(at)alternize(dot)com> wrote:
>
> > Try a), b), and c) in order on the "offending" tables as they address
> > the problem at increasing cost...
>
> thanks alot for the detailed information! the entire concept of vacuum
> isn't
> yet that clear to me, so your explanations and hints are very much
> appreciated. i'll defenitely try these steps this weekend when the next
> full
> vacuum was scheduled :-)

Thanks guys, that pretty much answered my question(s) too. I have a sneaking
suspicion that vacuuming won't do too much for us however... now that I
think about it - we do very little removing, pretty much only inserts and
selects. I will give it a vacuum full and see what happens.
Cheers
Antoine

--
This is where I should put some witty comment.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Marcos 2006-01-17 09:04:53 Use of Stored Procedures and
Previous Message me 2006-01-17 04:13:09 Re: new to postgres (and db management) and performance already a problem :-(