Re: Vacuum, Freeze and Analyze: the big picture

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Vacuum, Freeze and Analyze: the big picture
Date: 2013-06-02 22:20:30
Message-ID: CA+TgmoZ1XZThxegpeEz-7p9ZA+qAzVeHUDocytN8brHDd0v0Dw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 2:44 PM, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Do we know why anti-wraparound uses so many resources in the first place?
> The default settings seem to be quite conservative to me, even for a system
> that has only a single 5400 rpm hdd (and even more so for any real
> production system that would be used for a many-GB database).
>
> I wonder if there is something simple but currently unknown going on which
> is causing it to damage performance out of all proportion to the resources
> it ought to be using.

I can't rule that out. Personally, I've always attributed it to the
fact that it's (a) long and (b) I/O-intensive. But it's not
impossible there could also be bugs lurking.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2013-06-03 02:29:12 Perl 5.18 breaks pl/perl regression tests?
Previous Message Dimitri Fontaine 2013-06-02 20:10:13 Re: pg_dump with postgis extension dumps rules separately