Re: Vacuum ALL FULL

From: S Arvind <arvindwill(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Vacuum ALL FULL
Date: 2009-06-06 23:09:40
Message-ID: abf9211d0906061609q2551ed66n975b243eaa108a38@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Sorry Tom, i cant able to understand. Should i have to increse the
max_fsm_rel based on formula and re-run the vacuum command? The main reason
for vacuum for us is to increase performance of our db. Please tell value
for our kind of server(as provided in previous mail) ?

-- Arvind S

On Sun, Jun 7, 2009 at 4:32 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> S Arvind <arvindwill(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > So is it no use running
> > vacuumdb --all --analyze --full
> > as fsm map is full?
>
> Well, it's not of *no* use. But you'd be well advised to crank up the
> FSM size.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
>

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2009-06-06 23:12:31 Re: Vacuum ALL FULL
Previous Message Tom Lane 2009-06-06 23:02:33 Re: Vacuum ALL FULL