Re: Best practice - Vacuum. Replication suggestions and pg vs mysql

From: Ron Mayer <rm_pg(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com>
To: pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Best practice - Vacuum. Replication suggestions and pg vs mysql
Date: 2005-03-18 06:38:22
Message-ID: d1dsv0$q0v$1@news.hub.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-admin

Tom Lane wrote:
> David B <davidb999(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>>15minute lock is a long time.
> There's no lock, unless you are using VACUUM FULL which you shouldn't.

Or, I believe, if he has any GIST indexes (such as tsearch or
postgis ones). At least it seems normal vacuum locks GIST indexes
for quite some time here.

I ended up stopping using vacuum_cost_delay to minimize the
time those GIST indexes seemed locked.

Ron

PS: If I'm right, I wonder if VACUUM or at least autovacuum
should automatically force vacuum_cost_delay to zero while
holding locks (i.e. while doing GIST indexes) to reduce the
time those locks are held.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-admin by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2005-03-18 07:04:14 Re: Best practice - Vacuum. Replication suggestions and pg vs mysql
Previous Message Christopher Browne 2005-03-18 03:28:47 Re: Excessive growth of pg_attribute and other system tables