In-Reply-To: <4574.1114030270@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <6f4567d4e64297b356e2d71ec392cdae@richardplotkin.com>
	<4574.1114030270@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v622)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
Message-Id: <9c5b2bf6a0f5a0bc0abeb6b6c5cf7973@richardplotkin.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
From: Richard Plotkin <richard@richardplotkin.com>
Subject: Re: Disk filling, CPU filling, renegade inserts and deletes? 
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 09:29:39 -0700
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

I've also now tried looking at pg_class.relpages.  I compared the  
results before and after vacuum.  The results stayed the same, except  
for five rows that increased after the vacuum.  Here is the select on  
those rows after the vacuum:

              relname             | relnamespace | reltype | relowner |  
relam | relfilenode | reltablespace | relpages | reltuples |  
reltoastrelid | reltoastidxid | relhasindex | relisshared | relkind |  
relnatts | relchecks | reltriggers | relukeys | relfkeys | relrefs |  
relhasoids | relhaspkey | relhasrules | relhassubclass |    relacl
---------------------------------+--------------+---------+---------- 
+-------+-------------+---------------+----------+----------- 
+---------------+---------------+-------------+-------------+--------- 
+----------+-----------+-------------+----------+----------+--------- 
+------------+------------+-------------+---------------- 
+---------------
  pg_attribute_relid_attnam_index |           11 |       0 |        1 |   
  403 |       16686 |             0 |      292 |     10250 |              
0 |             0 | f           | f           | i       |        2 |     
      0 |           0 |        0 |        0 |       0 | f          | f    
        | f           | f              |
  pg_class_oid_index              |           11 |       0 |        1 |   
  403 |       16690 |             0 |       18 |      2640 |              
0 |             0 | f           | f           | i       |        1 |     
      0 |           0 |        0 |        0 |       0 | f          | f    
        | f           | f              |
  pg_depend_depender_index        |           11 |       0 |        1 |   
  403 |       16701 |             0 |       52 |      6442 |              
0 |             0 | f           | f           | i       |        3 |     
      0 |           0 |        0 |        0 |       0 | f          | f    
        | f           | f              |
  pg_type_oid_index               |           11 |       0 |        1 |   
  403 |       16731 |             0 |        8 |      1061 |              
0 |             0 | f           | f           | i       |        1 |     
      0 |           0 |        0 |        0 |       0 | f          | f    
        | f           | f              |
  pg_depend                       |           11 |   16677 |        1 |   
    0 |       16676 |             0 |       32 |      4200 |              
0 |             0 | t           | f           | r       |        7 |     
      0 |           0 |        0 |        0 |       0 | f          | f    
        | f           | f              | {=r/postgres}


On Apr 20, 2005, at 1:51 PM, Tom Lane wrote:

> Richard Plotkin <richard@richardplotkin.com> writes:
>> I'm having a pretty serious problem with postgresql's performance.
>> Currently, I have a cron task that is set to restart and vacuumdb -faz
>> every six hours.  If that doesn't happen, the disk goes from 10% full
>> to 95% full within 2 days (and it's a 90GB disk...with the database
>> being a 2MB download after dump), and the CPU goes from running at
>> around a 2% load to a 99+% load right away (the stats look like a
>> square wave).
>
> Q: what have you got the FSM parameters set to?
>
> Q: what exactly is bloating?  Without knowing which tables or indexes
> are growing, it's hard to speculate about the exact causes.  Use du and
> oid2name, or look at pg_class.relpages after a plain VACUUM.
>
> It's likely that the real answer is "you need to vacuum more often
> than every six hours", but I'm trying not to jump to conclusions.
>
> 			regards, tom lane
>
> ---------------------------(end of  
> broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
>       subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
>       message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
>