Message-ID: <4884A0F6.2000501@apache.org>
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2008 16:45:10 +0200
From: Andreas Hartmann <andreas@apache.org>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (Macintosh/20080421)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Less rows -> better performance?
References: <48846A02.7090702@apache.org> <48846DA3.2090308@archonet.com>	
	<4884722A.1000405@apache.org>
	<1d4e0c10807210432v45c6272awb1ea13974747de54@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <1d4e0c10807210432v45c6272awb1ea13974747de54@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Guillaume Smet schrieb:
> On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 1:25 PM, Andreas Hartmann <andreas@apache.org> wrote:
>> SELECT pg_database.datname,
>> pg_size_pretty(pg_database_size(pg_database.datname)) AS size
>> FROM pg_database where pg_database.datname = 'vvz_live_1';
>>
>>    datname    |  size
>> ---------------+---------
>>  vvz_live_1    | 2565 MB
>>
>> I wonder why the actual size is so much bigger than the data-only dump - is
>> this because of index data etc.?
> 
> More probably because the database is totally bloated. Do you run
> VACUUM regularly or did you set up autovacuum?

Thanks for the hint!

I just verified that the autovacuum property is enabled. I did the 
following to prepare the tests:

- setup two test databases, let's call them db_all and db_current
- import the dump from the live DB into both test DBs
- delete the old semester data from db_current, leaving only the current 
data

Both test DBs were 600 MB large after this. I did a VACUUM FULL ANALYZE 
on both of them now. db_all didn't shrink significantly (only 1 MB), 
db_current shrunk to 440 MB. We're using quite a lot of indexes, I guess 
that's why that much data are allocated.

-- Andreas

-- 
Andreas Hartmann, CTO
BeCompany GmbH
http://www.becompany.ch
Tel.: +41 (0) 43 818 57 01