Re: [ADMIN] Excessive growth of pg_attribute and other system tables

From: "Qingqing Zhou" <zhouqq(at)cs(dot)toronto(dot)edu>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] Excessive growth of pg_attribute and other system tables
Date: 2005-04-01 01:50:49
Message-ID: d2i9fa$26n5$1@news.hub.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-admin pgsql-hackers


"Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes
> Steve Crawford <scrawford(at)pinpointresearch(dot)com> writes:
> > On Monday 21 March 2005 11:40 am, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> However, given that there are 9334 tuples in 82282 pages, I'd say
> >> that autovacuum has already failed Steve rather badly :-(. There
> >> shouldn't be more than a couple hundred pages given that number of
> >> rows. Perhaps the FSM settings are too small?
>

Seems this is another question pointing to the inproper setting of
"can-be-avoided" shared memory parameters. Maybe we should eliminate GUC
parameters related to the FSM. Can we follow Alvaro's idea like spilling
some data of FSM into disk while keeping the indices and maybe part of data
in the memory? So no free page would be discarded due to no space to record
them in FSM? Also, in this handling, efficiency should not be a problem.

Regards,
Qingqing

In response to

Browse pgsql-admin by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Shashi Gireddy 2005-04-01 02:44:40 Re: initdb.exe error while installing postgres 8.0
Previous Message Joshua D. Drake 2005-04-01 00:33:31 Re: getGeneratedKeys()

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Christopher Kings-Lynne 2005-04-01 02:22:33 Re: Bug in DROP NOT NULL
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2005-04-01 01:31:14 Re: Debugging deadlocks