Skip site navigation (1)
Skip section navigation (2)
Peripheral Links
Header And Logo
|
Site Navigation
Re: more problems with count(*) on large table
- From: Bill Moran <wmoran(at)potentialtech(dot)com>
- To: Mike Charnoky <noky(at)nextbus(dot)com>
- Cc: Sean Davis <sdavis2(at)mail(dot)nih(dot)gov>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
- Subject: Re: more problems with count(*) on large table
- Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2007 14:44:35 -0400
In response to Mike Charnoky <noky(at)nextbus(dot)com>: > The autovacuum is turned on. Since this is pg8.1, I don't know when the > table was actually last vacuumed. I *did* run analyze on the table, > though. Also, nothing has been deleted in this table... so vacuum > should have no affect, right? Updated rows also produce dead tuples that require vacuuming. If the table is insert only, you don't need vacuum. -- Bill Moran http://www.potentialtech.com
- References:
- more problems with count(*) on large table
- From: Mike Charnoky
- Re: more problems with count(*) on large table
- From: Sean Davis
- Re: more problems with count(*) on large table
- From: Mike Charnoky
- more problems with count(*) on large table
- Prev by Date: Re: more problems with count(*) on large table
- Next by Date: Re: Using RETURNING with INTO inside pgsql
- Previous by thread: Re: more problems with count(*) on large table
- Next by thread: Re: more problems with count(*) on large table
- Indexes: