Message-ID: <4CD403D8.10109@tech.sdb.it>
Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2010 14:17:12 +0100
From: Silvio Brandani <silvio.brandani@tech.sdb.it>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Windows/20100228)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Silvio Brandani <silvio.brandani@tech.sdb.it>
Cc: Kevin Grittner <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>,
	Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>, pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: PANIC killing vacuum process
References: <4CD1886C.5000503@tech.sdb.it>
	<AANLkTimbD1=QaH0C+eNJAd7w-Prr4n28qpuOyuRvQ0f2@mail.gmail.com>
	<4CD15B26020000250003720C@gw.wicourts.gov>
	<4CD2BC3E.7030004@tech.sdb.it>
In-Reply-To: <4CD2BC3E.7030004@tech.sdb.it>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Silvio Brandani ha scritto:
> Kevin Grittner ha scritto:
>> Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com> wrote:
>>  
>>> Silvio Brandani <silvio.brandani@tech.sdb.it> wrote:
>>>     
>>  
>>  
>>>> we have develop a script to execute the vacuum full on all tables
>>>>       
>>  
>>  
>>> Vacuum full is more of a recovery / offline command and is to be
>>> used sparingly, especially before 9.0.
>>>     
>>  
>> And before 9.0, most of the situations where you might reasonably
>> consider VACUUM FULL, you were better off with CLUSTER.
>>  
>>  
>>>> very big database , since it is a 24 x 7 available system we have
>>>> not a timeframe to exec the vacuum full.
>>>>       
>>> Is there a reason you're avoiding autovacuum and tuning it to keep
>>> up?  It's usually the better option.
>>>     
>>  
>> Even if you have a case for doing database vacuums during off-peak
>> hours, you should almost certainly use autovacuum with settings at
>> least as aggressive as the default.  At our shop we configure
>> autovacuum more aggressively than the default, to keep our small,
>> volatile tables tidy, and run a vacuum of the entire database each
>> night (which is, by the way, a very different thing than a VACUUM
>> FULL).
>>  
>>  
>>>> PostgreSQL 8.3.1 on x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu
>>>>       
>>> Is there a good reason for avoiding about two years of updates
>>> (8.3.latest has a lot of bug fixes.)
>>>     
>>  
>> Yeah, this is important.  See this page:
>>  
>> http://www.postgresql.org/support/versioning
>>  
>> Many of those fixes to 8.3 after 8.3.1 were to vacuum or autovacuum.
>> You can poke around the release notes here:
>>  
>> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/static/release.html
>>  
>> If problems with autovacuum were what drove you toward VACUUM FULL,
>> you should update and try autovacuum again.  Going from 8.3.1 to
>> 8.3.12 is pretty painless and very safe -- just read the release
>> notes for details on what types of indexes need to be rebuilt after
>> the update.  (That probably won't affect you, but you should check.)
>>  
>> -Kevin
>>
>>   
> Thanks a lot.
> We will migrate to 8.3.12 and keep autovacuum running instead of vauum 
> full.
>
>
>
>
the postgres 9.0.x could be consider a stable version ?? or is better to 
wait 9.1 , in this case when will be released ??

thanks

-- 
Silvio Brandani
Infrastructure Administrator
SDB Information Technology
Phone: +39.055.3811222
Fax:   +39.055.5201119

---


Utilizziamo i dati personali che la riguardano esclusivamente per nostre finalità amministrative e contabili, anche quando li comunichiamo a terzi. Informazioni dettagliate, anche in ordine al Suo diritto di accesso e agli altri Suoi diritti, sono riportate alla pagina http://www.savinodelbene.com/privacy.html
Se avete ricevuto questo messaggio per errore Vi preghiamo di ritornarlo al mittente eliminandolo assieme agli eventuali allegati, ai sensi art. 616 codice penale http://www.savinodelbene.com/privacy/codice_penale_616.html
L'Azienda non si assume alcuna responsabilità giuridica qualora pervengano da questo indirizzo messaggi estranei all'attività lavorativa o contrari a norme.
--