From: | "Matt Clark" <matt(at)ymogen(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, "Rob Nagler" <nagler(at)bivio(dot)biz>, <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: reindex/vacuum locking/performance? |
Date: | 2003-10-03 23:44:33 |
Message-ID: | LFEIJBEOKGPDHCEMDGNFEEOECFAA.matt@ymogen.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
> Also, if you find that you need to run VACUUM FULL often, then
> you need to
> raise your max_fsm_pages.
Yes and no. If it's run often enough then the number of tracked pages
shouldn't need to be raised, but then again...
...max_fsm_pages should be raised anyway. I'm about to reclaim a Pentium
166 w/ 64MB of RAM from a friend I lent it to _many_ years ago, and I
suspect PG would run happily on it as configured by default. Set it to at
least 50,000 I say. What do you have to lose, I mean if they're not free
then they're not tracked in the FSM right?
Of course if anyone knows a reason _not_ to raise it then I'm all ears!
Matt
>
> --
> -Josh Berkus
> Aglio Database Solutions
> San Francisco
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Neil Conway | 2003-10-03 23:48:07 | Re: reindex/vacuum locking/performance? |
Previous Message | Rod Taylor | 2003-10-03 23:32:16 | Re: Speeding up Aggregates |