From: Tobias Brox <tobias@nordicbet.com>
To: Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>
Cc: Tobias Brox <tobias@nordicbet.com>
Cc: Paul Lathrop <plathrop@squaretrade.com>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Defining performance.
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2006 02:07:54 +0100
Message-ID: <20061201010754.GA1448@oppetid.no> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1164934674.7773.148.camel@dogma.v10.wvs>
References: <456F624F.2090906@squaretrade.com>
<20061201000537.GA15466@oppetid.no>
<1164934674.7773.148.camel@dogma.v10.wvs>
[Jeff Davis - Thu at 04:57:54PM -0800]
> > We're having the same issues, so we do the dumping and restoring every
> > now and then to be sure everything is properly cleaned up. With 8.1.
> >
>
> What's causing that? Is it index bloat?
>
> I would think a REINDEX would avoid having to dump/restore, right? A
> CLUSTER might also be necessary, depending on what kind of performance
> degradation you're experiencing.
>
> Am I missing something?
Just as with Paul Lathrops case, the performance degradation is
something perceived by the application developers. We haven't had time
to actually verify reliably that the performance is actually beeing
degraded, neither that the reload beeing done helps (after we resolved
the pending transaction issue, anyway), nor look into what the possible
reasons of this percieved degradation could be.
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: tobias@nordicbet.com, pgsql@j-davis.com, plathrop@squaretrade.com
Subject: Re: Defining performance.
In-Reply-To: <20061201010754.GA1448@oppetid.no>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox