Re: Vacuum, Freeze and Analyze: the big picture
| От | Jeff Janes |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Vacuum, Freeze and Analyze: the big picture |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAMkU=1y0irGcbNRaxtUBJdNPHRt9AMorwgKM-DzAPZiwKTLwSw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Vacuum, Freeze and Analyze: the big picture (Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Vacuum, Freeze and Analyze: the big picture
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 5:03 AM, Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
On 06/02/2013 05:56 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> (b) users> making ridiculous settings changes to avoid the problems caused bySome recent experiences I've had have also bought home to me that vacuum
> anti-wraparound vacuums kicking in at inconvenient times and eating up
> too many resources.
problems are often of the user's own making.
"My database is slow"
->
"This autovacuum thing is using up lots of I/O and CPU, I'll increase
this delay setting here"
Do you think this was the correct diagnosis but with the wrong action taken, or was the diagnosis incorrect in the first place (i.e. it may be using some IO and CPU, but that isn't what was causing the initial problem)? And if the diagnosis was correct, was it causing problems under default settings, or only because they already turned off the cost delay?
Cheers,
Jeff
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: