X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 269DB9DCAB0 for ; Wed, 15 Mar 2006 14:43:19 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 98419-01 for ; Wed, 15 Mar 2006 14:43:16 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from uproxy.gmail.com (uproxy.gmail.com [66.249.92.197]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD5F89DC9AC for ; Wed, 15 Mar 2006 14:43:14 -0400 (AST) Received: by uproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id u40so98336ugc for ; Wed, 15 Mar 2006 10:43:15 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:from:cc:references:subject:date:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-priority:x-msmail-priority:x-mailer:x-mimeole; b=raToDu7hP70qqqwONiih2Fww17lZ6HxzGqZMEv1lbim3v6MgyhZqhfcOjcdPhguo5yXb2h6WL1G8sXiB4oa4vavQfmV2wz0M7ARhZjE3ss9UUStea4ZLfi6VqLPY+fpzgkwSaT665nB4rs8I13mfXh4XWLb1XMo9oP0K5eDAK0s= Received: by 10.66.243.6 with SMTP id q6mr184173ugh; Wed, 15 Mar 2006 10:43:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from maniek ( [62.148.95.123]) by mx.gmail.com with ESMTP id m1sm7694533ugc.2006.03.15.10.43.13; Wed, 15 Mar 2006 10:43:14 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <03ae01c64860$6039d160$0c67a8c0@maniek> From: =?iso-8859-2?Q?Marcin_Ma=F1k?= Cc: References: <024d01c64818$9b5790e0$0c67a8c0@maniek> <4418005A.70108@archonet.com> Subject: Re: VACUUM FULL hangs Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 19:43:35 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-2" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1506 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1506 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.174 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.015, MISSING_HEADERS=0.189] X-Spam-Score: 0.174 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200603/211 X-Sequence-Number: 17648 > I'm a bit puzzled as to how you managed to get so much free space at the > start of the table. Did the replication work on the second try? It actually worked on third try, I guess. > OK, so you might well be getting the vacuum writing one page, then WAL, > then vacuum, etc. That will mean the disk spends most of its time > seeking back and fore. How many disks do you have, and is the WAL on a > separate set of disks? It is 2 spindles software RAID1 . Till now there were no performance problems with this machine that would mandate trying anything more fancy, this machine is low traffic. Greetings Marcin Mañk