Re: Size for vacuum_mem
От | Shridhar Daithankar |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Size for vacuum_mem |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3DEF4A91.28988.4E2A807@localhost обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Size for vacuum_mem (Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
On 4 Dec 2002 at 19:38, Neil Conway wrote: > > Currently a vacuum full takes 3+ hours and very soon the amount of data > > will increase. > Do you need to use VACUUM FULL? Let me elaborate this statement. 1) You need vacuum full only to recover space from deleted tuples. Unless the database has undergone major deletion somewhere 'vacuum full' might be a cannon to kill an ant. 2) You should consider vacuuming tablewise. Vacuum is useful only for those tables which change at a faster rate. A lookup or archive table might not need vacuum. Just vacuum the tables which are heavily updated/deleted/inserted. And by heavily, I mean heavily in terms of tuples. Inserting a single 200MB BLOB and vacuuming the table might not yield any performance improvement.. HTH Bye Shridhar -- blithwapping: Using anything BUT a hammer to hammer a nail into the wall, such as shoes, lamp bases, doorstops, etc. -- "Sniglets", Rich Hall & Friends
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: