Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Peripheral Links

Header And Logo

PostgreSQL
| The world's most advanced open source database.

Site Navigation

Search for
  Advanced Search

Re: Performance query about large tables, lots of concurrent access


  • From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
  • To: Karl Wright <kwright(at)metacarta(dot)com>
  • Cc: Francisco Reyes <lists(at)stringsutils(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
  • Subject: Re: Performance query about large tables, lots of concurrent access
  • Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2007 13:57:58 -0400
  • Message-id: <20070620175758(dot)GP30369(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>

Karl Wright wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> >Karl Wright wrote:
> >
> >>(b) the performance of individual queries had already degraded 
> >>significantly in the same manner as what I'd seen before.
> >
> >You didn't answer whether you had smaller, more frequently updated
> >tables that need more vacuuming.  This comment makes me think you do.  I
> >think what you should be looking at is whether you can forget vacuuming
> >the whole database in one go, and make it more granular.
> 
> I am afraid that I did answer this.  My largest tables are the ones 
> continually being updated.  The smaller ones are updated only infrequently.

Can you afford to vacuum them in parallel?

-- 
Alvaro Herrera                  http://www.amazon.com/gp/registry/5ZYLFMCVHXC
"Java is clearly an example of money oriented programming"  (A. Stepanov)



Home | Main Index | Thread Index

Privacy Policy | PostgreSQL Archives hosted by Command Prompt, Inc. | Designed by tinysofa
Copyright © 1996 – 2008 PostgreSQL Global Development Group