From: Dennis <dennis@works4me.com>
To: David Mitchell <david.mitchell@telogis.com>
Cc: Qingqing Zhou <zhouqq@cs.toronto.edu>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: performance problems ... 100 cpu utilization
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2005 09:03:12 -0700
Message-ID: <42D7DE40.3070507@works4me.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <42D7069B.5090107@telogis.com>
References: <42D567DB.6000100@works4me.com>
<db4l9c$1g4t$1@news.hub.org>
<42D5DBEB.4010503@works4me.com>
<42D5F315.3090301@telogis.com>
<42D60C2E.3020004@works4me.com>
<42D7069B.5090107@telogis.com>
David Mitchell wrote:
> If your table has got into this state, then vacuum analyze won't fix
> it. You will have to do a vacuum full to get it back to normal, then
> regularly vacuum (not full) to keep it in good condition. We vacuum
> our critical tables every 10 minutes to keep them in good nick.
So should I have vacuum run during the load test? At what level of
updates should it run every ten minutes?
Dennis
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: dennis@works4me.com, david.mitchell@telogis.com, zhouqq@cs.toronto.edu
Subject: Re: performance problems ... 100 cpu utilization
In-Reply-To: <42D7DE40.3070507@works4me.com>
* 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