Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.187]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AADAC9FA62D for ; Tue, 9 Oct 2007 17:19:02 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.187]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 49146-02 for ; Tue, 9 Oct 2007 17:18:50 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.5 Received: from mx00.pub.collaborativefusion.com (mx00.pub.collaborativefusion.com [206.210.89.199]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01EAE9FA5FD for ; Tue, 9 Oct 2007 17:18:52 -0300 (ADT) Received: from vanquish.pitbpa0.priv.collaborativefusion.com (vanquish.pitbpa0.priv.collaborativefusion.com [192.168.2.61]) (SSL: TLSv1/SSLv3,256bits,AES256-SHA) by wingspan with esmtp; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 16:18:48 -0400 id 0005643A.470BE228.00013F7A Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 16:18:48 -0400 From: Bill Moran To: "Radhika S" Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Postgres running Very slowly Message-Id: <20071009161848.ef0f3ca6.wmoran@collaborativefusion.com> In-Reply-To: References: Organization: Collaborative Fusion X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.4.4 (GTK+ 2.10.14; i386-portbld-freebsd6.2) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200710/90 X-Sequence-Number: 27112 In response to "Radhika S" : > Hi -, > I have a very peculiar situation. > > I am running a postgres 7.4.6 database. It is running slow....... . 7.4.6 is very old. You're lucky it hasn't corrupted your data. At least upgrade to the latest 7.4.18 (yes, that's 12 patches ahead of you). Optimally, upgrade to 8.2.5, which has a huge number of performance improvements. > I vacuum --analyze daily. I just did again. > I did a vacuum full last night. > > But to no avail. CPU usage and memory are normal, but the system is > crawling. You need to specifically define "crawling" before anyone will be able to provide any useful advice. What queries are running slow? What does the explain output look like? The answers are in the details, so we can't provide the answers unless you provide the details. Like the OS you're running it on, for example. > Here is the info from vacuum. > > CPU 0.02s/0.01u sec elapsed 0.02 sec. > INFO: free space map: 167 relations, 1412 pages stored; 3440 total pages > needed > DETAIL: Allocated FSM size: 1000 relations + 20000 pages = 178 kB shared > memory. > VACUUM This doesn't look problematic, so I doubt your vacuum policy is to blame. -- Bill Moran Collaborative Fusion Inc. http://people.collaborativefusion.com/~wmoran/ wmoran@collaborativefusion.com Phone: 412-422-3463x4023