From: Jim C. Nasby <decibel@decibel.org>
To: Guillaume Cottenceau <gc@mnc.ch>
Cc: Michael Stone <mstone+postgres@mathom.us>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [doc patch] a slight VACUUM / VACUUM FULL doc improvement proposal
Date: Wed, 16 May 2007 10:48:09 -0500
Message-ID: <20070516154809.GL14548@nasby.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87hcqdb4g5.fsf@meuh.mnc.lan>
References: <87lkfqavg9.fsf@meuh.mnc.lan>
<20070515174427.GG1785@mathom.us>
<87hcqdb4g5.fsf@meuh.mnc.lan>
On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 09:41:46AM +0200, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
> Michael Stone <mstone+postgres 'at' mathom.us> writes:
>
> > On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 06:43:50PM +0200, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
> > >patch - basically, I think the documentation under estimates (or
> > >sometimes misses) the benefit of VACUUM FULL for scans, and the
> > >needs of VACUUM FULL if the routine VACUUM hasn't been done
> > >properly since the database was put in production.
> >
> > It's also possible to overestimate the benefit of vacuum full, leading
> > to people vacuum full'ing almost constantly, then complaining about
> > performance due to the associated overhead. I think there have been
> > more people on this list whose performance problems were caused by
> > unnecessary full vacs than by those whose performance problems were
> > caused by insufficient full vacs.
>
> Come on, I don't suggest to remove several bold warnings about
> it, the best one being "Therefore, frequently using VACUUM FULL
> can have an extremely negative effect on the performance of
> concurrent database queries." My point is to add the few
> additional mentions; I don't think the claims that VACUUM FULL
> physically compacts the data, and might be useful in case of too
> long time with infrequent VACUUM are incorrect, are they?
Unfortunately they are, to a degree. VACUUM FULL can create a
substantial amount of churn in the indexes, resulting in bloated
indexes. So often you have to REINDEX after you VACUUM FULL.
Long term I think we should ditch 'VACUUM FULL' altogether and create a
COMPACT command (it's very easy for users to get confused between
"vacuum all the databases in the cluster" or "vacuum the entire
database" and "VACUUM FULL").
--
Jim Nasby decibel@decibel.org
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell)
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: decibel@decibel.org, gc@mnc.ch, mstone+postgres@mathom.us
Subject: Re: [doc patch] a slight VACUUM / VACUUM FULL doc improvement proposal
In-Reply-To: <20070516154809.GL14548@nasby.net>
* 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