Re: [pgsql-www] pg_autovacuum is nice ... but ...

Moved to -hackers where this belongs :)

On Fri, 5 Nov 2004, Justin Clift wrote:

> Tom Lane wrote:
> <snip>
>> Yup. 20000 < 23072, so you're losing some proportion of FSM entries.
>> What's worse, the FSM relation table is maxed out (1000 = 1000) which
>> suggests that there are relations not being tracked at all; you have
>> no idea how much space is getting leaked in those.
>> 
>> You can determine the number of relations potentially needing FSM
>> entries by
>>     select count(*) from pg_class where relkind in ('r','i','t');
>> --- sum over all databases in the cluster to get the right result.
>> 
>> Once you've fixed max_fsm_relations, do vacuums in all databases, and
>> then vacuum verbose should give you a usable lower bound for
>> max_fsm_pages.
>
> Would making max_fsm_relations and max_fsm_pages dynamically update 
> themselves whilst PostgreSQL runs be useful?  Sounds like they're the 
> kind of things that many people would receive maximum benefit if 
> PostgreSQL altered these settings as needed itself.

I'm not sure if I like this one too much ... but it would be nice if 
something like this triggered a warning in the logs, maybe a feature of 
pg_autovacuum itself?

----
Marc G. Fournier           Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy@hub.org           Yahoo!: yscrappy              ICQ: 7615664