Re: Planning to change autovacuum_vacuum_scale_factor value tozero. Please suggest me if any negative impact.
От | Laurenz Albe |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Planning to change autovacuum_vacuum_scale_factor value tozero. Please suggest me if any negative impact. |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1523431746.2428.19.camel@cybertec.at обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Planning to change autovacuum_vacuum_scale_factor value to zero.Please suggest me if any negative impact. (Raghavendra Rao J S V <raghavendrajsv@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Planning to change autovacuum_vacuum_scale_factor value to zero.Please suggest me if any negative impact.
|
Список | pgsql-general |
Raghavendra Rao J S V wrote: > We are using postgres 9.2 version on Centos operating system. We have around 1300+ tables. > We have following auto vacuum settings are enables. Still few of the tables which are always busy are not vacuumed. Dueto that tables are bloating and observed few areas has performance degradation. > > autovacuum_max_workers = 6 > autovacuum_naptime = 15s > autovacuum_vacuum_threshold = 25 > autovacuum_analyze_threshold = 10 > autovacuum_vacuum_scale_factor = 0.1 > autovacuum_analyze_scale_factor = 0.05 > autovacuum_vacuum_cost_delay = 10ms > autovacuum_vacuum_cost_limit = 1000 > > To avoid the above problem, I am planning to make ' autovacuum_vacuum_scale_factor' value to zero and autovacuum_vacuum_threshold value to 150. Please suggest me does it have any negative impact. That's an excellent way to keep your database from functioning well. Rather, raise autovacuum_vacuum_cost_limit, or, more aggressively, set autovacuum_vacuum_cost_delay to 0. It is better to change the settings on individual busy tables than changing them globally. Yours, Laurenz Albe -- Cybertec | https://www.cybertec-postgresql.com
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: