X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D58EED92E7 for ; Wed, 28 Sep 2005 01:15:53 -0300 (ADT) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 56155-10 for ; Wed, 28 Sep 2005 04:15:51 +0000 (GMT) Received: from wolff.to (wolff.to [66.93.197.194]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id DE6F6D71EA for ; Wed, 28 Sep 2005 01:15:50 -0300 (ADT) Received: (qmail 1136 invoked by uid 500); 28 Sep 2005 04:16:45 -0000 Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 23:16:45 -0500 From: Bruno Wolff III To: Tobias Brox Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: The need for full vacuum / reindex Message-ID: <20050928041645.GA956@wolff.to> Mail-Followup-To: Bruno Wolff III , Tobias Brox , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org References: <20050928033327.GU5679@tobias.lan> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050928033327.GU5679@tobias.lan> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.007 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.007] X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200509/386 X-Sequence-Number: 14694 On Wed, Sep 28, 2005 at 05:33:27 +0200, Tobias Brox wrote: > By occation, we dropped the whole production database and refreshed it from > a database backup - and all our performance problems seems to have gone. I > suppose this means that to keep the database efficient, one eventually does > have to do reindexing and/or full vacuum from time to time? Normally you only need to do that if you didn't vacuum often enough or with high enough fsm setting and bloat has gotten out of hand to the point that you need to recover some space.