Re: Managing autovacuum freezing
От | Peter Geoghegan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Managing autovacuum freezing |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAH2-WzmD28vA7DYNV1TipsBLgb0Q7w8vJPEx6G83UdyXm5vA0Q@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Managing autovacuum freezing (Don Seiler <don@seiler.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Managing autovacuum freezing
|
Список | pgsql-admin |
On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 11:23 AM Don Seiler <don@seiler.us> wrote: > Right. I was thinking we'd still do the nightly manual vacuum, adding in the INDEX_CLEANUP option after disabling the attributeat the table level. But was wondering if we should still consider enabling autovacuum on that table to hopefullylessen the work needed by the wraparound-prevention aggressive autovac. Regular autovacuum (any VACUUM) will freeze tuples, so that certainly makes sense to me. Sometimes it can seem like it's skipping the work done in an anti-wraparound vacuum entirely because only the latter insists on doing cleanup of every heap page, if necessary by waiting to get a buffer pin -- and that could be harder during a busy period. And also because the visibility bits in the VM can allow regular vacuum to skip a lot more work than anti-wraparound vacuum, which can only skip pages with the freeze bit set. An anti-wraparound vacuum is actually less different to a regular autovacuum than most users intuit. Though I get it why it seems that way -- the practical difference can be really noticeable in production, even though the theoretical differences seem rather small to me. -- Peter Geoghegan
В списке pgsql-admin по дате отправления: