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 09E2A9DC97C for ; Tue, 17 Jan 2006 11:07:33 -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 57847-05 for ; Tue, 17 Jan 2006 11:07:38 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from vms044pub.verizon.net (vms044pub.verizon.net [206.46.252.44]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A906D9DC95C for ; Tue, 17 Jan 2006 11:07:31 -0400 (AST) Received: from osgiliath.mathom.us ([70.108.47.21]) by vms044.mailsrvcs.net (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-4.02 (built Sep 9 2005)) with ESMTPA id <0IT8008LDSONQ2R3@vms044.mailsrvcs.net> for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Tue, 17 Jan 2006 09:07:36 -0600 (CST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by osgiliath.mathom.us (Postfix) with ESMTP id E11406061604 for ; Tue, 17 Jan 2006 10:07:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from osgiliath.mathom.us ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (osgiliath.home.mathom.us [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 16196-02-6 for ; Tue, 17 Jan 2006 10:07:33 -0500 (EST) Received: by osgiliath.mathom.us (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 34DAF6061601; Tue, 17 Jan 2006 10:07:33 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 10:07:32 -0500 From: Michael Stone Subject: Re: Autovacuum / full vacuum In-reply-to: To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Mail-followup-to: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Message-id: <20060117150732.GY1408@mathom.us> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-disposition: inline X-Pgp-Fingerprint: 53 FF 38 00 E7 DD 0A 9C 84 52 84 C5 EE DF 7C 88 X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mathom.us References: <43CCC711.504@familyhealth.com.au> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.107 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.107] X-Spam-Score: 0.107 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200601/238 X-Sequence-Number: 16716 On Tue, Jan 17, 2006 at 03:50:38PM +0100, Michael Riess wrote: >about the FSM: You say that increasing the FSM is fairly cheap - how >should I know that? Why would you assume otherwise, to the point of not considering changing the setting? The documentation explains how much memory is used for FSM entries. If you look at vacuum verbose output it will tell you how much memory you're currently using for the FSM. Mike Stone