Re: Very long deletion time on a 200 GB database
От | Reuven M. Lerner |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Very long deletion time on a 200 GB database |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4F4B9A6D.1060102@lerner.co.il обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Very long deletion time on a 200 GB database (Shaun Thomas <sthomas@peak6.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Very long deletion time on a 200 GB database
Re: Very long deletion time on a 200 GB database |
Список | pgsql-performance |
Hi, Shaun. You wrote: > >> In the end, it was agreed that we could execute the deletes over >> time, deleting items in the background, or in parallel with the >> application's work. After all, if the disk is filling up at the rate >> of 2 GB/day, then so long as we delete 4 GB/day (which is pretty easy >> to do), we should be fine. > > Please tell me you understand deleting rows from a PostgreSQL database > doesn't work like this. :) The MVCC storage system means you'll > basically just be marking all those deleted rows as reusable, so your > database will stop growing, but you'll eventually want to purge all the > accumulated dead rows. Oh, I understand that all right. I've had many, *many* conversations with this company explaining MVCC. It doesn't seem to work; when they refer to "vacuuming the database," I remind them that we have autovacuum working, to which they respond, "Oh, we mean VACUUM FULL." At which point I remind them that VACUUM FULL is almost certainly not what they want to do, and then they say, "Yes, we know, but we still like to do it every so often." From what I understand, the issue isn't one of current disk space, but rather of how quickly the disk space is being used up. Maybe they want to reclaim disk space, but it's more crucial to stop the rate at which disk space is being taken. If we were to delete all of the existing rows, and let vacuum mark them as dead and available for reuse, then that would probably be just fine. I wouldn't be surprised if we end up doing a CLUSTER at some point. The problem is basically that this machine is in 24/7 operation at high-speed manufacturing plants, and the best-case scenario is for a 4-hour maintenance window. I've suggested that we might be able to help the situation somewhat by attaching a portable USB-based hard disk, and adding a new tablespace that'll let us keep running while we divide up the work that the disk is doing, but they've made it clear that the current hardware configuration cannot and will not change. Period. So for now, we'll just try to DELETE faster than we INSERT, and combined with autovacuum, I'm hoping that this crisis will be averted. That said, the current state of affairs with these machines is pretty fragile, and I think that we might want to head off such problems in the future, rather than be surprised by them. Reuven -- Reuven M. Lerner -- Web development, consulting, and training Mobile: +972-54-496-8405 * US phone: 847-230-9795 Skype/AIM: reuvenlerner
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: