Received: from maia.hub.org (maia-2.hub.org [200.46.204.251]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4499D1337B61 for ; Fri, 24 Sep 2010 15:34:14 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.251]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 37854-10 for ; Fri, 24 Sep 2010 18:34:07 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from outbound.afilias.info (outbound.afilias.info [69.46.124.26]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 386C21337B53 for ; Fri, 24 Sep 2010 15:34:07 -0300 (ADT) Received: from ms6.yyz2.afilias-ops.info ([10.50.129.112] helo=smtp.afilias.info) by outbound.afilias.info with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OzD5y-0005eG-5R for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Fri, 24 Sep 2010 18:34:06 +0000 Received: from tor-gateway.afilias.info ([199.15.87.4] helo=[10.10.46.12]) by smtp.afilias.info with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OzD5y-0005Kw-8B for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Fri, 24 Sep 2010 18:34:06 +0000 Message-ID: <4C9CEF1E.6000903@ca.afilias.info> Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2010 14:34:06 -0400 From: Brad Nicholson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.9) Gecko/20100920 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Memory usage - indexes References: <865426.21884.qm@web39701.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4C9CDCDD.8000603@ca.afilias.info> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.21 tagged_above=-10 required=5 tests=BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 201009/175 X-Sequence-Number: 40378 On 10-09-24 01:41 PM, Tobias Brox wrote: > What do you mean, that you could run regular vacuum less frequently, > or that the regular vacuum would go faster? It means that vacuums ran less frequently. With cron triggered vacuums, we estimated when tables needed to be vacuumed, and vacuumed them accordingly. Because of unpredictable shifts in activity, we scheduled the vacuums to happen more often than needed. With autovacuum, we vacuum some of our large tables far less frequently. We have a few large tables that used to get vacuumed every other day that now get vacuumed once or twice a month. The vacuums themselves take longer now as we use the vacuum cost delay to control the IO. That wasn't an option for us when we did manual vacuums as that was in 8.1 when vacuums were still treated as long running transactions. Stretching a vacuum out to a few hours prior to 8.2 would bloat other tables. -- Brad Nicholson 416-673-4106 Database Administrator, Afilias Canada Corp.