From: Matthew T. O'Connor <matthew@zeut.net>
To: Mark Stosberg <mark@summersault.com>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Auto-Vacuum in 8.1 was ineffective for me. 8.2 may work better?
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 15:36:32 -0500
Message-ID: <45DCAD50.8080104@zeut.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <eria2f$2ut7$1@news.hub.org>
References: <eri3hk$2dss$1@news.hub.org>
<20070221185544.GX25424@alvh.no-ip.org>
<eria2f$2ut7$1@news.hub.org>
Mark Stosberg wrote:
> Let me ask the question a different way: Is simply setting the two
> values plus enabling autovacuuming generally enough, or is further
> tweaking common place?
No, most people in addition to setting those two GUC settings also lower
the threshold values (there is a fair amount of discussion on this in
the lists) the defaults are not aggressive enough, so you tables
probably aren't getting vacuumed often enough to keep up with the load.
Some work loads also require that you do cron based vacuuming of
specific highly active tables.
> Perhaps I'll give it another tree when we upgrade to 8.2.
Autovacuum is still somewhat new, and there were some significant
improvements in 8.2 so yes you should give it another try.
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: matthew@zeut.net, mark@summersault.com
Subject: Re: Auto-Vacuum in 8.1 was ineffective for me. 8.2 may work better?
In-Reply-To: <45DCAD50.8080104@zeut.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