Re: [SQL] 7.3 analyze & vacuum analyze problem
От | Ron Mayer |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [SQL] 7.3 analyze & vacuum analyze problem |
Дата | |
Msg-id | POEDIPIPKGJJLDNIEMBEMEOACKAA.ron@intervideo.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [SQL] 7.3 analyze & vacuum analyze problem (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [SQL] 7.3 analyze & vacuum analyze problem
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
Josh wrote... > Achilleus, > > > I am afraid it is not so simple. > > What i (unsuccessfully) implied is that > > dynacom=# VACUUM ANALYZE status ; > > VACUUM > > dynacom=# ANALYZE status ; > > ANALYZE > > dynacom=# > > > > [is enuf to damage the performance.] > > You're right, that is mysterious. If you don't get a response from one of > the major developers on this forum, I suggest that you post those EXPLAIN > results to PGSQL-BUGS. I had the same problem a while back. http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2002-08/msg00015.php http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2002-08/msg00018.php http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2002-08/msg00018.php Short summary: Later in the thread Tom explained my problem as free space not being evenly distributed across the table so ANALYZE's sampling gave skewed results. In my case, "pgstatuple" was a good tool for diagnosing the problem, "vacuum full" fixed my table and a much larger fsm_* would have probably prevented it.
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: