Received: from earlj.nesusa.com (fw1.nesusa.com [204.31.203.254]) by hub.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA09123 for ; Mon, 17 May 1999 14:06:14 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from jearl@box100.com) Received: (from earlj@localhost) by earlj.nesusa.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) id MAA27409; Mon, 17 May 1999 12:06:08 -0600 Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 12:06:08 -0600 Message-Id: <199905171806.MAA27409@earlj.nesusa.com> X-Authentication-Warning: earlj.nesusa.com: earlj set sender to jearl@box100.com using -f From: Jason Earl To: eg@tzv.fal.de CC: pgsql-interfaces@postgreSQL.org In-reply-to: <99051709490504.00692@salo.tzv.fal.de> (message from Eildert Groeneveld on Mon, 17 May 1999 09:45:49 +0200) Subject: Re: [INTERFACES] Vacuum takes for ever References: <99051709490504.00692@salo.tzv.fal.de> Hello everyone, in a substantial multi location development project we are using PG to create a large information system. After having loaded data in the order of one million records a vaccum took 50h of CPU time on a 350MHz PII (RedHat 5.2, pg 6.4.2). There were no deletes or anyting like that. I made a test database when I was deciding whether PostgreSQL was going to be up to the task. It just so happens that it had a million records in it as well. The first vacuum took a very very long time, subsequent vacuums, however, took much less time. What does vaccum do that takes so long and is there a way to speed this up? Apparently it does some "database stuff." Yikes, someone else will have to answer that question. I just know how to get data in and out of PostgreSQL. Jason Earl