Re: Performance query about large tables, lots of concurrent access
От | Karl Wright |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Performance query about large tables, lots of concurrent access |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 46796BF0.8010302@metacarta.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Performance query about large tables, lots of concurrent access (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Performance query about large tables, lots of concurrent access
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Karl Wright wrote: >> Alvaro Herrera wrote: >>> Karl Wright wrote: >>> >>>> (b) the performance of individual queries had already degraded >>>> significantly in the same manner as what I'd seen before. >>> You didn't answer whether you had smaller, more frequently updated >>> tables that need more vacuuming. This comment makes me think you do. I >>> think what you should be looking at is whether you can forget vacuuming >>> the whole database in one go, and make it more granular. >> I am afraid that I did answer this. My largest tables are the ones >> continually being updated. The smaller ones are updated only infrequently. > > Can you afford to vacuum them in parallel? > Hmm, interesting question. If VACUUM is disk limited then it wouldn't help, probably, unless I moved various tables to different disks somehow. Let me think about whether that might be possible. Karl
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: