Re: Postgresql backend to perform vacuum automatically
От | Dann Corbit |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Postgresql backend to perform vacuum automatically |
Дата | |
Msg-id | D90A5A6C612A39408103E6ECDD77B82906F3FC@voyager.corporate.connx.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Postgresql backend to perform vacuum automatically ("Nicolas Bazin" <nbazin@ingenico.com.au>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
-----Original Message----- From: Bruce Momjian [mailto:pgman@candle.pha.pa.us] Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2002 12:59 PM To: mlw Cc: Tom Lane; Nicolas Bazin; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Postgresql backend to perform vacuum automatically > > > If they do not affect performance, then why have them off? > > > > I think Jan said 2-3%. If we can get autovacuum from it, it would be a > > win to keep it on all the time, perhaps. > > Assuming that the statistics get updated: > > How often should the sats table be queried? > What sort of configurability would be needed? You could wake up every few minutes and see how the values have changed. I don't remember if there is a way to clear that stats so you can see just the changes in the past five minutes. Vacuum the table that had activity. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>> How long does it take to vacuum a table with 12 indexes and 100 million rows in it? This idea is making me very nervous. Suppose (for instance) that we have regular updates to some table, and it is constantly getting vacuum attempts thrown at it. Now imagine a large systems with many large tables which are frequently receiving updates. Would 100 simultaneous vacuum operations be a good thing when .0001% of the table has changed [on average] for each of them? I know for sure "update statistics" at regular intervals on some of the SQL systems I have used would be sheer suicide. Better make it configurable, that's for sure. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< <<<<
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: