Re: Less rows -> better performance?
От | Andreas Hartmann |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Less rows -> better performance? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4884A0F6.2000501@apache.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Less rows -> better performance? ("Guillaume Smet" <guillaume.smet@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Less rows -> better performance?
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
Guillaume Smet schrieb: > On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 1:25 PM, Andreas Hartmann <andreas@apache.org> wrote: >> SELECT pg_database.datname, >> pg_size_pretty(pg_database_size(pg_database.datname)) AS size >> FROM pg_database where pg_database.datname = 'vvz_live_1'; >> >> datname | size >> ---------------+--------- >> vvz_live_1 | 2565 MB >> >> I wonder why the actual size is so much bigger than the data-only dump - is >> this because of index data etc.? > > More probably because the database is totally bloated. Do you run > VACUUM regularly or did you set up autovacuum? Thanks for the hint! I just verified that the autovacuum property is enabled. I did the following to prepare the tests: - setup two test databases, let's call them db_all and db_current - import the dump from the live DB into both test DBs - delete the old semester data from db_current, leaving only the current data Both test DBs were 600 MB large after this. I did a VACUUM FULL ANALYZE on both of them now. db_all didn't shrink significantly (only 1 MB), db_current shrunk to 440 MB. We're using quite a lot of indexes, I guess that's why that much data are allocated. -- Andreas -- Andreas Hartmann, CTO BeCompany GmbH http://www.becompany.ch Tel.: +41 (0) 43 818 57 01
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: