Re: Vacuum time degrading

From: Wes <wespvp(at)syntegra(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Postgresql-General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Vacuum time degrading
Date: 2005-03-02 18:36:01
Message-ID: BE4B63B1.7E62%wespvp@syntegra.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers

On 3/2/05 12:16 PM, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> Would you post the complete VACUUM VERBOSE log? The CPU/elapsed time lines
> would help us identify where the time is going.

Mailed.

I do see stats like:

CPU 518.88s/25.17u sec elapsed 10825.33 sec.
CPU 884.96s/64.35u sec elapsed 13793.13 sec.
CPU 132.46s/6.66u sec elapsed 2435.42 sec.
CPU 49.25s/4.15u sec elapsed 414.71 sec.

This is a dual CPU hyperthreaded (which probably makes little difference
here) 2.4Ghz RedHat 3.0. The database is on an 8-disk SCSI hardware RAID 5
with 10k rpm disks. Pg_xlog is on a separate volume.

I thought it was a 2.6 kernel, but it looks like it is 2.4.20. I need to
monitor the system when the vacuum is running to see if sar/top show
anything. I wonder if it's hitting the kswapd thrashing problem?

Wes

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Edward Macnaghten 2005-03-02 19:01:03 Re: pgadmin3 / postgresql newbie question
Previous Message Wes 2005-03-02 18:21:44 Re: Vacuum time degrading

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Adler 2005-03-02 18:45:15 Re: 8.0.X and the ARC patent
Previous Message Tom Lane 2005-03-02 18:21:47 Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] snprintf causes regression tests to fail