Re: Replication Syatem
От | Greg Smith |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Replication Syatem |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Pine.GSO.4.64.0804290347560.20575@westnet.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Replication Syatem ("Gauri Kanekar" <meetgaurikanekar@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Replication Syatem
Re: Replication Syatem |
Список | pgsql-performance |
On Tue, 29 Apr 2008, Gauri Kanekar wrote: > We do vacuum full, as vacuum verbose analyse dont regain space for us. Ah, now we're getting to the root of your problem here. You expect that VACUUM should reclaim space. Whenever you UPDATE a row, it writes a new one out, then switches to use that version. This leaves behind the original. Those now unused rows are what VACUUM gathers, but it doesn't give that space back to the operating system. The model here assumes that you'll need that space again for the next time you UPDATE or INSERT a row. So instead VACUUM just keeps those available for database reuse rather than returning it to the operating system. Now, if you don't VACUUM frequently enough, this model breaks down, and the table can get bigger with space that may never get reused. The idea is that you should be VACUUMing up now unneeded rows at about the same rate they're being re-used. When you don't keep up, the database can expand in space that you don't get back again. The right answer to this problem is not to use VACUUM FULL; it's to use regular VACUUM more often. -- * Greg Smith gsmith@gregsmith.com http://www.gregsmith.com Baltimore, MD
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: