Re: Vacuum, Freeze and Analyze: the big picture
От | Greg Stark |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Vacuum, Freeze and Analyze: the big picture |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAM-w4HPkna59h_8fp5Y03e1-A-csRJuUOtSeMLWQmmt7wJqFtg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Vacuum, Freeze and Analyze: the big picture (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 7:48 PM, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote: > The big, big picture is this: > > 90% of our users need to think about VACUUM/ANALYZE > at least 10% of the time > and 10% of our users need to think about it > almost 90% of the time. > > That's considerably better than was the case 5 years ago, when vacuum > management was a daily or weekly responsibility for nearly 100% of our > users, Fwiw I think this is not the right picture. I think the current situation an accurate description of the way things are and have always been. It's an arms race. We've raised the bar of how large and busy your database has to be before vacuum becomes a pain and users scale their databases up. As long as we stay one step ahead of the users 90% of users won't have to think about vacuum/analyze much. There will always be outliers. When the visibility map went in the argument was that wraparound was so rare that it wasn't worth doubling the size of the visibility map to have a second bit. If the table gets even a low amount of traffic nearly all blocks will need to be frozen anyways by that time. To do something like the visibility map for freezing we would need something like a map that stores the high 8 bits of the oldest unfrozen xid in the block. That be a lot more complex and take a lot more space. -- greg
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: