> Mark Woodward wrote:
>> OK, here's my problem, I have a nature study where we have about 10
>> video
>> cameras taking 15 frames per second.
>> For each frame we make a few transactions on a PostgreSQL database.
>
> Maybe if you grouped multiple operations on bigger transactions, the I/O
> savings could be enough to buy you the ability to vacuum once in a
> while. Or consider buffering somehow -- save the data elsewhere, and
> have some sort of daemon to put it into the database. This would allow
> to cope with the I/O increase during vacuum.
The problem is ssufficiently large that any minor modification can easily
hide the problem for a predictble amount of time. My hope was that someone
would have a real "long term" work around.
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
match
