Re: Bad performance for a 3000 rows table updated
От | Manfred Koizar |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Bad performance for a 3000 rows table updated |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 8s929v0l2kcv5vgc4tu3ao8adfm6nvh9j8@4ax.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Bad performance for a 3000 rows table updated (<fred-pg@jolliton.com>(Frederic Jolliton)) |
Ответы |
Re: Bad performance for a 3000 rows table updated
|
Список | pgsql-novice |
On Sat, 05 Apr 2003 23:38:25 +0200, <fred-pg@jolliton.com>(Frederic Jolliton) wrote: >I don't know exactly how to pick a good value for MAX_FSM_PAGES. If you have only two active tables and with the size you reported, the defaults should be sufficient. FSM settings have been discussed in more deatil before. Search the archives for details. >SELECT relname,relpages [...] > >give 156 for the main table, doing a VACUUM every minute, Is this number stable or always increasing? If the latter, how fast is it growing? VACUUM (without FULL) never truncates a relation. When your relation size gets out of control, do a VACUUM FULL to restore a sane state. > then after a >VACUUM FULL give 52 (and a initial value of 10 when benching from a >clean database.) This initial value is only an assumption and has nothing to do with the real size. relpages is not accurate at every moment, AFAIK it is updated only by some administrative commands (VACUUM, ANALYSE, CREATE INDEX, etc). Servus Manfred
В списке pgsql-novice по дате отправления: