Received: from localhost (maia-5.hub.org [200.46.204.182]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D3BE9FB818 for ; Fri, 25 May 2007 07:48:24 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.182]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 96499-01-2 for ; Fri, 25 May 2007 07:48:15 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: delayed 02:18:46.316803 by SQLgrey-1.7.5 Received: from wp045.webpack.hosteurope.de (wp045.webpack.hosteurope.de [80.237.132.52]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51C9A9FB879 for ; Fri, 25 May 2007 07:48:19 -0300 (ADT) Received: from d088150.adsl.hansenet.de ([80.171.88.150] helo=[192.168.1.44]); authenticated by wp045.webpack.hosteurope.de running ExIM using esmtpa id 1HrXLF-0001B9-RP; Fri, 25 May 2007 12:48:17 +0200 Message-ID: <4656BEF1.4050609@bastian-voigt.de> Date: Fri, 25 May 2007 12:48:17 +0200 From: Bastian Voigt User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (X11/20070502) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Performance Problem with Vacuum of bytea table (PG 8.0.13) References: <46569E6A.2060509@bastian-voigt.de> <4656BB5E.3000109@archonet.com> In-Reply-To: <4656BB5E.3000109@archonet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-bounce-key: webpack.hosteurope.de; post@bastian-voigt.de; 1180090098; ce445f56; X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.361 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL=-0.360, BAYES_50=0.001, RCVD_IN_NJABL_PROXY=0.721 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200705/492 X-Sequence-Number: 24882 OK, I'll give that a try. What about pg_autovacuum then? Is it a problem when two processes try to vacuum the same table in parallel? Or do I need to deactivate autovacuum altogether? > > Try vacuuming every 3 minutes and see what happens. > (Sorry Richard, forgot to reply to the list!) -- Bastian Voigt Neumünstersche Straße 4 20251 Hamburg telefon +49 - 40 - 67957171 mobil +49 - 179 - 4826359