Re: more about pg_toast growth

Jeffrey W. Baker wrote:
> On Tue, 2002-04-09 at 11:52, Jan Wieck wrote:
> >     I still believe it's due to the massive amount of data pumped
> >     through that table between vacuums and inappropriate settings
> >     for the freespace map size for this particular case.
> >
> >     Initially  I suggested an FSM size of 50,000 "to start with".
> >     That was meant as an introduction to play around  with  these
> >     parameters a little, figuring out what the right settings are
> >     in his case, and reporting back the result. What we got  back
> >     after  a  week  or longer, was a lax "still doesn't work". It
> >     seemed to me he had not spent alot of time to understand  the
> >     underlying  concepts,  nor has he ever taken a single look at
> >     the code.
>
> I don't need this abuse.  I'm perfectly capable of reading the source
> code for PostgreSQL.  I helped diagnose a spinlock contention problem in
> the 7.2beta series and I maintain DBD::Pg.  And I've contributed source
> code to several other projects which I need not list here.

    Abuse of what?

    I  did  not  mean  to  offend  you in any way. Maybe I wasn't
    carefull enough in choosing my words, maybe  you  missed  the
    smiley  in  my  earlier  posting  (that  about doing a little
    math), maybe whatever.

    Anyway,  seems  we  don't  get  along  well  enough  to  work
    together.   Thus,  it's  better  you  help  someone  else  to
    diagnose your problem.  Good luck.


Jan

--

#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me.                                  #
#================================================== JanWieck@Yahoo.com #