Message-ID: <5167DB9A.2070206@archonet.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 11:02:02 +0100
From: Richard Huxton <dev@archonet.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
	rv:10.0.12) Gecko/20130116 Icedove/10.0.12
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Thiyagarajan, Palaniappan" <pthiyagarajan@cashedge.com>
CC: "pgsql-performance@postgresql.org" <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: PsqL8.3
References: 
 <3ACC453DAE8B4642A1788C2844096FD64FBB26339F@MBX13.EXCHPROD.USA.NET>
In-Reply-To: 
 <3ACC453DAE8B4642A1788C2844096FD64FBB26339F@MBX13.EXCHPROD.USA.NET>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org

On 11/04/13 22:09, Thiyagarajan, Palaniappan wrote:
> All,
>
> We have performance issue in Psql8.3 vacuum run.  The CPU usage going
> 300+ and application getting slow.  How do we avoid high cpu and
> smooth vacuum tables.

I'm afraid this isn't nearly enough information for anyone to help.

1. Full version details, some idea of hardware and database size might 
be useful. Exactly when this happens etc.

2. Is this a manual vacuum or autovacuum?

3. Are you familiar with the manual page regarding the vacuum settings?
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/static/runtime-config-autovacuum.html

4. If so, what changes have you made?

5. You are aware that 8.3 is end-of-life? And you are running 8.3.23 
until you upgrade, aren't you?
http://www.postgresql.org/support/versioning/


Typically you'd expect disk i/o to be the limiting factor with vacuum 
rather than CPU. However, it might just be that I've misunderstood your 
description. More details please.

-- 
   Richard Huxton
   Archonet Ltd


-- 
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance