Re: Berserk Autovacuum (let's save next Mandrill)
| От | Darafei "Komяpa" Praliaskouski |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Berserk Autovacuum (let's save next Mandrill) |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAC8Q8tJKDVKGnN9whu0zijBXzfioaTGHaGetwLGetO4L4xVz8Q@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Berserk Autovacuum (let's save next Mandrill) (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>) |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 6:13 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
On 2019-Mar-31, Darafei "Komяpa" Praliaskouski wrote:
> Alternative point of "if your database is super large and actively written,
> you may want to set autovacuum_freeze_max_age to even smaller values so
> that autovacuum load is more evenly spread over time" may be needed.
I don't think it's helpful to force emergency vacuuming more frequently;
quite the contrary, it's likely to cause even more issues. We should
tweak autovacuum to perform freezing more preemtively instead.
Okay. What would be your recommendation for the case of Mandrill running current Postgres 11? Which parameters shall they tune and to which values?
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
Darafei Praliaskouski
Support me: http://patreon.com/komzpa
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: