Re: Re: dramatic slowdown. . .fixed by vacuum

From: The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>
To: Joe Slag <jslag(at)visi(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-novice(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Re: dramatic slowdown. . .fixed by vacuum
Date: 2000-07-21 20:20:23
Message-ID: Pine.BSF.4.21.0007211719240.325-100000@thelab.hub.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-novice

On Fri, 21 Jul 2000, Joe Slag wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 21, 2000 at 12:36:35PM -0700, WOLF, PATRICK wrote:
> > Try running vacuum on the table or the database. Here's an excerpt from the
> > man on vacuum:
> >
> [snip]
> >
> >
>
> Thanks to all who responded. I vacuumed out foo, and sure enough
> the select time is down to 10 seconds again.
>
> I see in the docs the suggestion:
>
> We recommend that active production databases be VACUUMM-ed nightly
>
> Is this how people tend to do their vacuuming? Does anyone do programmatic
> vacuums instead of / in addition to a nightly run? Is vacuuming mainly
> necessary after big deletes, or are there other common situations
> requiring it?

UPDATEs are a combination of 'INSERT new tuple/mark old as DELETEd', so
for each UPDATE, you are adding one more tuple to the table but not
removing anything. VACUUM removes that DELETEd tuple.

In response to

Browse pgsql-novice by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew McMillan 2000-07-21 21:35:47 Re: Re: dramatic slowdown. . .fixed by vacuum
Previous Message Anthony E . Greene 2000-07-21 20:20:22 Re: Re: dramatic slowdown. . .fixed by vacuum