| From: | Reid Thompson <reid(dot)thompson(at)ateb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Vick Khera <vivek(at)khera(dot)org> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Reid Thompson <reid(dot)thompson(at)ateb(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: number of page slots needed (1576544) exceeds max_fsm_pages (204800)] |
| Date: | 2010-01-18 19:49:52 |
| Message-ID: | 20100118194952.GH6399@ateb.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 02:43:11PM -0500, Vick Khera wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 1:47 PM, Reid Thompson <reid(dot)thompson(at)ateb(dot)com> wrote:
> > Does this max_fsm_pages value seem OK for a 46GB database?
> > I've clustered all the tables that seemed to be exhibiting large amounts
> > of bloat.
>
>
> One more thing you may wish to consider is running re-index on your
> tables. I found that a lot of pages with empty space were compacted
> and the number of fsm entries went down significantly when I did this
> last week. For me this was more important than running cluster to
> pack the data tables themselves.
It was my belief that cluster would re-build the indexes as part of the
cluster operation. Is that belief incorrect?
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Chris Barnes | 2010-01-18 20:05:59 | Equivalent of mysql type mediablob in postgres? |
| Previous Message | Vick Khera | 2010-01-18 19:43:11 | Re: number of page slots needed (1576544) exceeds max_fsm_pages (204800)] |