From: Steve Poe <spoe@sfnet.cc>
To: andrew@pillette.com
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: What *_mem to increase when running CLUSTER
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 13:56:11 +0000
Message-ID: <1124978171.11102.12.camel@amd64-laptop-spoe> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <430E1AF6.9030803@pillette.com>
References: <6EE64EF3AB31D5448D0007DD34EEB3417DD1D2@Herge.rcsinc.local>
<430E1AF6.9030803@pillette.com>
Andrew,
On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 12:24 -0700, Andrew Lazarus wrote:
> Should I temporarily increase sort_mem, vacuum_mem, neither, or both
> when doing a CLUSTER on a large (100 million row) table where as many as
> half of the tuples are deadwood from UPDATEs or DELETEs? I have large
> batch (10 million row) inserts, updates, and deletes so I'm not sure
> frequent vacuuming would help.
You may need to experiment with both. What version of Postgres? What is
the size of your database? How many concurrent users? If you're seeing
half of the tuples are dead, I look at checking your max_fsm_pages and
max_fsm_relations after a full vacuum analyze before doing too much with
sort mem.
Your mileage may vary.
Best of luck.
Steve Poe
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: spoe@sfnet.cc, andrew@pillette.com
Subject: Re: What *_mem to increase when running CLUSTER
In-Reply-To: <1124978171.11102.12.camel@amd64-laptop-spoe>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
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