On Aug 18, 2011, at 10:41 AM, Greg Smith wrote:
> that was all they got.  I'm going to add directly computing the write MB/s 
> figure from the dirty data written too, since that ends up being the thing 
> that I keep deriving by hand anyway.

I know folks have talked about progress, but I haven't seen anything 
specific... could you add info about what table/index vacuum is working on, and 
how far along it is? I realize that's not very close to an actual % completion, 
but it's far better than what we have right now.

FWIW, the number I end up caring about isn't so much write traffic as read. 
Thanks to a good amount of battery-backed write cache (and possibly some iSCSI 
misconfiguration), our writes are generally much cheaper than our reads.
--
Jim C. Nasby, Database Architect                   j...@nasby.net
512.569.9461 (cell)                         http://jim.nasby.net



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

Reply via email to