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 F3F2C11F623F for ; Tue, 4 Apr 2006 12:37:57 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 55095-08 for ; Tue, 4 Apr 2006 12:37:53 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from smtp.nildram.co.uk (smtp.nildram.co.uk [195.112.4.54]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5842E11F6247 for ; Tue, 4 Apr 2006 12:37:53 -0300 (ADT) Received: from [192.168.0.5] (unknown [84.12.155.199]) by smtp.nildram.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67CD633B72B; Tue, 4 Apr 2006 16:35:20 +0100 (BST) Subject: Re: vacuum full seems to hang on very small table From: Simon Riggs To: Dan Harris Cc: PostgreSQL Performance In-Reply-To: <443289E3.7020801@drivefaster.net> References: <443289E3.7020801@drivefaster.net> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2006 16:35:14 +0100 Message-Id: <1144164914.13549.502.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.3 (2.2.3-2.fc4) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.098 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.098] X-Spam-Score: 0.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200604/46 X-Sequence-Number: 18130 On Tue, 2006-04-04 at 08:59 -0600, Dan Harris wrote: > I have a table with 1 live row that I found has 115000 dead rows in it ( > from a testing run ). I'm trying to VACUUM FULL the table and it has > run for over 18 hours without completion. Considering the hardware on > this box and the fact that performance seems reasonable in all other > aspects, I'm confused as to why this would happen. The database other > than this table is quite large ( 70 gigs on disk ) and I would expect to > take days to complete but I just did 'vacuum full table_stats'. That > should only do that table, correct? I'm running 8.0.3. Read this http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.0/static/release-8-0-5.html and you'll probably decide to upgrade. Best Regards, Simon Riggs