Re: Question about optimizing access to a table.
От | Kevin Grittner |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Question about optimizing access to a table. |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1386779298.89425.YahooMailNeo@web162901.mail.bf1.yahoo.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Question about optimizing access to a table. (Herouth Maoz <herouth@unicell.co.il>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
Herouth Maoz <herouth@unicell.co.il> wrote: > On 10/12/2013, at 20:55, Kevin Grittner wrote: >> First, make sure that you are on the latest minor release of >> whatever major release you are running. There were some serious >> problems with autovacuum's table truncation when a table was >> used as a queue and size fluctuated. These are fixed in the >> latest set of minor releases. > > I failed to mention which version of PostgreSQL I was on. > 9.1.2 in this case. Do you mean that I have to go to 9.3.x or > simply to 9.1.11? In the PostgreSQL world, a minor release is when everything to the left of the second dot stays the same. http://www.postgresql.org/support/versioning/ 9.1.11 contains the fix for the problems I was describing. While it's a good idea to stay current with minor releases in general, for those using a table for a queue which may fluctuate in size, there is an important set of fixes that make it particularly important right now. I have seen multiple sites using Slony where, without the fixes, the database became unusable for normal production after falling behind and subsequently catching up. -- Kevin Grittner EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: