pg.ddx.io pgsql-admin@postgresql.org mailing list archive
help / color / mirror / Atom feedmax_fsm_relations
7+ messages / 5 participants
[nested] [flat]
* max_fsm_relations
@ 2005-01-04 14:56 Pallav Kalva <pkalva@deg.cc>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Pallav Kalva @ 2005-01-04 14:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-admin
Hi Everybody,
I want to set max_fsm_relations parameter in the postgres.conf file
is there any way to find out the count of all the
tables and indexes in all the databases without running any vacuum
verbose commands ?
Thanks!
Pallav
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: max_fsm_relations
@ 2005-01-06 17:28 Jaime Casanova <systemguards@yahoo.com>
parent: Pallav Kalva <pkalva@deg.cc>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Jaime Casanova @ 2005-01-06 17:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-admin
--- Pallav Kalva <pkalva@deg.cc> escribió:
> Hi Everybody,
>
> I want to set max_fsm_relations parameter in
> the postgres.conf file
> is there any way to find out the count of all the
> tables and indexes in all the databases without
> running any vacuum
> verbose commands ?
>
maybe
select count(*) from pg_class where relname like
'some-prefix-youuse%';
but you need to do this per-database. besides your
tables must have a prefix to identify them if they
have not maybe the owner if it is postgres, wll i
don't know.
regards,
Jaime Casanova
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Información de Estados Unidos y América Latina, en Yahoo! Noticias.
Visítanos en http://noticias.espanol.yahoo.com
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 7+ messages in thread
* max_fsm_relations
@ 2008-11-30 05:34 Adam Radłowski <adamr@informatyka.gdansk.pl>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Adam Radłowski @ 2008-11-30 05:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-admin
PostgreSQL 8.1.3 (windows), 8.1.9 - 8.1.10 (linux).
I have databases, what are vacuumed using cron very regularry (vacuumdb
-a -f ...) and I know when should do this. Automatic vacuuming is off.
There are thousands of tables in one cluster (for ex. 10000). If I do
vacuuming manually, I can see the warning:
NOTICE: max_fsm_relations(1000) equals the number of relations checked
HINT: You have at least 1000 relations. Consider increasing the
configuration parameter "max_fsm_relations".
But all is working properly. Do I need really to increase
max_fsm_relations (and corresponding start values) for postgresql server
? If I should "to consider" only it looks, that it is not needed in my
situation. I'm right ?
Brgds
Adam
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: max_fsm_relations
@ 2008-11-30 17:51 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
parent: Adam Radłowski <adamr@informatyka.gdansk.pl>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Tom Lane @ 2008-11-30 17:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Adam Radłowski <adamr@informatyka.gdansk.pl>; +Cc: pgsql-admin
=?ISO-8859-2?Q?Adam_Rad=B3owski?= <adamr@informatyka.gdansk.pl> writes:
> PostgreSQL 8.1.3 (windows), 8.1.9 - 8.1.10 (linux).
> I have databases, what are vacuumed using cron very regularry (vacuumdb
> -a -f ...) and I know when should do this. Automatic vacuuming is off.
> There are thousands of tables in one cluster (for ex. 10000). If I do
> vacuuming manually, I can see the warning:
> NOTICE: max_fsm_relations(1000) equals the number of relations checked
> HINT: You have at least 1000 relations. Consider increasing the
> configuration parameter "max_fsm_relations".
> But all is working properly.
Only for small values of "properly". You will be seeing table bloat
over time if you don't make the FSM large enough.
regards, tom lane
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: max_fsm_relations
@ 2008-11-30 19:52 Adam Radłowski <adamr@informatyka.gdansk.pl>
parent: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Adam Radłowski @ 2008-11-30 19:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>; +Cc: pgsql-admin
So, are You suggesting, that at the time of full database vacuuming,
some of tables are not vacuumed, when "max_fsm_relations" is to small ?
Thanks for Your fast answer.
Adam
Tom Lane pisze:
> =?ISO-8859-2?Q?Adam_Rad=B3owski?= <adamr@informatyka.gdansk.pl> writes:
>> PostgreSQL 8.1.3 (windows), 8.1.9 - 8.1.10 (linux).
>> I have databases, what are vacuumed using cron very regularry (vacuumdb
>> -a -f ...) and I know when should do this. Automatic vacuuming is off.
>> There are thousands of tables in one cluster (for ex. 10000). If I do
>> vacuuming manually, I can see the warning:
>> NOTICE: max_fsm_relations(1000) equals the number of relations checked
>> HINT: You have at least 1000 relations. Consider increasing the
>> configuration parameter "max_fsm_relations".
>> But all is working properly.
>
> Only for small values of "properly". You will be seeing table bloat
> over time if you don't make the FSM large enough.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: max_fsm_relations
@ 2008-12-01 13:17 Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
parent: Adam Radłowski <adamr@informatyka.gdansk.pl>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Alvaro Herrera @ 2008-12-01 13:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Adam Radłowski <adamr@informatyka.gdansk.pl>; +Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>; pgsql-admin
Adam Radłowski wrote:
> So, are You suggesting, that at the time of full database vacuuming,
> some of tables are not vacuumed, when "max_fsm_relations" is to small ?
No. They will all be vacuumed. The difference is that the space
reclaimed by vacuum will not be reused unless it is recorded by the FSM.
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: max_fsm_relations
@ 2008-12-01 16:43 Adam Radłowski <adamr@informatyka.gdansk.pl>
parent: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Adam Radłowski @ 2008-12-01 16:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>; +Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>; pgsql-admin
Now I got full information. Big thanks.
Adam
Alvaro Herrera pisze:
> Adam Radłowski wrote:
>> So, are You suggesting, that at the time of full database vacuuming,
>> some of tables are not vacuumed, when "max_fsm_relations" is to small ?
>
> No. They will all be vacuumed. The difference is that the space
> reclaimed by vacuum will not be reused unless it is recorded by the FSM.
>
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 7+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2008-12-01 16:43 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox mbox.gz follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2005-01-04 14:56 max_fsm_relations Pallav Kalva <pkalva@deg.cc>
2005-01-06 17:28 ` Jaime Casanova <systemguards@yahoo.com>
2008-11-30 05:34 max_fsm_relations Adam Radłowski <adamr@informatyka.gdansk.pl>
2008-11-30 17:51 ` Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
2008-11-30 19:52 ` Adam Radłowski <adamr@informatyka.gdansk.pl>
2008-12-01 13:17 ` Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
2008-12-01 16:43 ` Adam Radłowski <adamr@informatyka.gdansk.pl>
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox