Received: from localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 743879FB4A7 for ; Thu, 26 Oct 2006 17:55:34 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 32545-06 for ; Thu, 26 Oct 2006 17:55:31 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from pat.laterooms.com (fon.laterooms.com [194.24.251.1]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 556339FB685 for ; Thu, 26 Oct 2006 17:35:47 -0300 (ADT) Received: from pat.laterooms.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pat.laterooms.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B04EEC424 for ; Thu, 26 Oct 2006 21:35:45 +0100 (BST) Received: from eddie.acentral.co.uk (80-192-144-33.cable.ubr04.pres.blueyonder.co.uk [80.192.144.33]) by pat.laterooms.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 858CEC14F for ; Thu, 26 Oct 2006 21:35:45 +0100 (BST) Received: from eddie.acentral.co.uk (eddie.acentral.co.uk [127.0.0.1]) by eddie.acentral.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B61F75F6B for ; Thu, 26 Oct 2006 21:35:47 +0100 (BST) Received: from localhost (unknown [10.0.0.23]) by eddie.acentral.co.uk (Postfix) with SMTP id 56FBC75E34 for ; Thu, 26 Oct 2006 21:35:47 +0100 (BST) Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2006 21:35:56 +0100 From: Gavin Hamill To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: VACUUMs take twice as long across all nodes Message-Id: <20061026213556.174bd7b5.gdh@laterooms.com> In-Reply-To: <20061026191728.GD26892@nasby.net> References: <20061026095827.9e85e1c0.gdh@laterooms.com> <20196.1161874041@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20061026160609.5e94e581.gdh@laterooms.com> <20061026191728.GD26892@nasby.net> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.4 (GTK+ 2.8.20; i486-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP X-AV-Checked: ClamAV using ClamSMTP X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.134 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=FORGED_RCVD_HELO, SPF_PASS X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200610/563 X-Sequence-Number: 21692 On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 14:17:29 -0500 "Jim C. Nasby" wrote: > Are you sure that there's nothing else happening on the machine that > could affect the vacuum times? Like, say a backup? Or perhaps updates > coming in from Slony that didn't used to be there? I'm absolutely certain. The backups run from only one slave, given that it is a full copy of node 1. Our overnight traffic has not increased any, and the nightly backups show that the overall size of the DB has not increased more than usual growth. Plus, I have fairly verbose logging, and it's not showing anything out of the ordinary. Like I said, it's one of those awful hypothesis/hand-waving problems :) Cheers, Gavin.