From: "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>
Organization: Command Prompt, Inc.
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: VACUUM vs. REINDEX
Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2006 20:24:24 -0700
User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1
Cc: "Chris Hoover" <revoohc@gmail.com>,
	"William Scott Jordan" <wsjordan@brownpapertickets.com>,
	"Jeff Frost" <jeff@frostconsultingllc.com>
References: <6.2.3.0.2.20060707145857.0342ca58@mail.pandimensional.com>
	<6.2.3.0.2.20060707174316.0742f670@mail.brownpapertickets.com>
	<1d219a6f0607071828q1d63fe55k8a1faeccf03b0884@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <1d219a6f0607071828q1d63fe55k8a1faeccf03b0884@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-15"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200607072024.25142.jd@commandprompt.com>


> William,
>
> You need to increase your fsm settings.  The database is telling you it is
> trying to store 177K+ pages, but you have only provided it with 20K.  Since
> these pages are cheap, I would set your fsm up with at least the following.
>
> max_fsm_pages 500000
> max_fsm_relations 5000
>
> This should provide PostgreSQL with enough space to work.  You still might
> need to run one more vacuum full once you change the setting so that you
> can recover the space that was lost due to your fsm begin to small. 
Yes he will need to run a vacuum full but I actually doubt he needs to 
increase his max_fsm_pages that much, he just needs to vacuum more.

Joshua D. Drake