On May 5, 6:16 pm, alvhe...@alvh.no-ip.org (Alvaro Herrera) wrote: > Excerpts from Joshua D. Drake's message of mié may 05 15:37:05 -0400 2010: > > > On Wed, 2010-05-05 at 09:40 -0700, Nikola wrote: > > > > I looked at the pg_class table and noticed that its size is 1010Mb and > > > index size is 1137Mb, while the table itself has only 3615 rows in it. > > > I tried vacuuming it, but that did not change anything. Is there > > > anything I can do to get this table back to the size it is supposed to > > > be at? > > > > PostgreSQL 8.2.6 on Windows 2003 Server. > > > vacuum full, its an exclusive lock though. > > Note though that there being such few tuples, it should be rather quick. > > > I don't recall if 8.2 autovacuum would vacuum system catalogs or not. > > Eh, of course it would. > -- > > -- > Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-gene...@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your > subscription:http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
Vacuum full worked. It blocked all queries for about 15 minutes, but it was not nearly as long as I thought it would be. pg_class (and other catalog tables that had similar issues on a smaller scale) significantly reduced in size resulting in much quicker (almost instantaneous) response from pgAdmin. Thanks for the help. -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
