Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.184]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 913EB2E106F for ; Fri, 30 Nov 2007 23:21:01 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.184]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 77037-01 for ; Fri, 30 Nov 2007 23:20:34 -0400 (AST) Received: from wa-out-1112.google.com (wa-out-1112.google.com [209.85.146.183]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 715F32E3024 for ; Fri, 30 Nov 2007 23:20:42 -0400 (AST) Received: by wa-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id m38so3492370waf for ; Fri, 30 Nov 2007 19:20:40 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=r5CEd1cbsGQteJmGEzNJMCZmm0nxBdnUoEB6u9m8rYE=; b=c5ejI+Pupx07Uy+c5T2JBym17XRoUqKitdakzmBze1E6KL07NhKZr8iKQbsFm3MOTyPJq9lD6EPV9ISS0Bd/mrJSVW4sUIMrSiI/pZsGOQCJ/Z9dloyWZS8F1fyU0yunuP6nTWqkXjE1Poixd0GYTaY/6RBA5G6b4nSFTukl560= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=gf3PwYTrGKwUhTwadJYWzJFqUkrZrbs7TzdeyxEY9J6sIxL2YH0b4JoBY6IATGOTpl/2O26U1wVEQa7jF3Zn0oSM9P+QDL5wltmbtuKlBQxQ5nCGKdcGXJsnHf6EzhDJPfv9WzwQnnX802QwgUrhQu5YHz+deyHCvPach12/sUQ= Received: by 10.114.168.1 with SMTP id q1mr847385wae.1196479240756; Fri, 30 Nov 2007 19:20:40 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.114.53.7 with HTTP; Fri, 30 Nov 2007 19:20:40 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2007 21:20:40 -0600 From: "Scott Marlowe" To: "Jonah H. Harris" Subject: Re: Enhancement request Cc: "Joshua D. Drake" , "Tom Lane" , "Campbell, Lance" , "posgres support" In-Reply-To: <36e682920711301453x2d361iff5d3f8679606d3e@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <36e682920711301218m703b3c67s6f547fd7b9b60e7c@mail.gmail.com> <7099.1196458205@sss.pgh.pa.us> <36e682920711301332q1cce5db9qe44fb068fcd5608d@mail.gmail.com> <7341.1196459304@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20071130140005.18521c54@jd-laptop> <36e682920711301453x2d361iff5d3f8679606d3e@mail.gmail.com> X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200711/273 X-Sequence-Number: 27516 On Nov 30, 2007 4:53 PM, Jonah H. Harris wrote: > On Nov 30, 2007 5:00 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > > > So: show me a use case for this that will still make sense in a > > > mostly-autovacuum world. > > > > I think you are living in a different world than I am if you think it > > is a mostly-autovacuum world. > > Same here. > > > Yes autovacuum is great for general low use scenarios. Throw it at a > > database doing hundreds of thousands (or even millions) of transactions > > an hour that has relations that in the multiple hundred gig range and > > autovacuum is useless for a good portion of that database. > > Yes, this is precisely the case I'm talking about. Every single > high-volume client we have or have consulted for is using custom > vacuuming. Autovacuum works fine for the common case, but it doesn't > handle high-volume databases very well yet. That's the case today, because autovacuum is single threaded and can't hit >1 table at once, so a single very large table vacuum could allow other, smaller tables to bloat inordinately. Which is why 8.3 can vacuum > 1 table at a time. I'm not against having a schema keyword mind you, I'm just pointing out that the ultimate goal of the hackers seems to be an autovacuum daemon that can keep the database vacuumed without the need for user initiated vacuums at all. Not sure 8.3 will get us there. But the multi-threaded autovac is a darn good start.