From: | Chris <bajasands(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Alban Hertroys <haramrae(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Performance degrades until dump/restore |
Date: | 2012-04-19 17:04:33 |
Message-ID: | CAMv1wqeMYcWO-Z5rwA-R-5v4mK_8RQA_BWVxa8hqFesaew1Lbw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
That's a great idea Alban. I think that between your suggestion and
looking into memory & swap, we may be on to something. I'll post back with
more details (per the wiki suggestions) if I'm not able to get this
resolved.
Thanks!
On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 9:40 AM, Alban Hertroys <haramrae(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On 19 April 2012 16:09, Chris <bajasands(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > Hi Chris,
> > It is postgres 9.1, with default settings. The autovacuum settings are
> all
> > commented out, I have not change dthem. My understanding is that analyze
> is
> > also run automatically by default.
> >
> > So, I believe the answer to both questions is 'Yes'.
>
> Most likely autovacuum is falling behind with default settings. If
> that's the case, increasing the frequency with which it checks that
> particular table should help.
>
> Or you can explicitly run VACUUM ANALYZE after a batch of inserts finished.
> --
> If you can't see the forest for the trees,
> Cut the trees and you'll see there is no forest.
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Nolan | 2012-04-19 17:07:50 | Re: PostgreSQL 9.1 Hot Backup Error: the database system is starting up |
Previous Message | Chris | 2012-04-19 17:02:31 | Re: Performance degrades until dump/restore |