On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 1:08 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 12:13 PM, Scott Marlowe <scott.marl...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 4:50 PM, Josh Berkus <j...@agliodbs.com> wrote: >>> Which is the opposite of my experience; currently we have several >>> clients who have issues which required more-frequent analyzes on >>> specific tables. Before 8.4, vacuuming more frequently, especially on >>> large tables, was very costly; vacuum takes a lot of I/O and CPU. Even >>> with 8.4 it's not something you want to increase without thinking about >>> the tradeoff >> >> Actually I would think that statement would be be that before 8.3 >> vacuum was much more expensive. The changes to vacuum for 8.4 mostly >> had to do with moving FSM to disk, making seldom vacuumed tables >> easier to keep track of, and making autovac work better in the >> presence of long running transactions. The ability to tune IO load >> etc was basically unchanged in 8.4. > > What about http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.4/static/storage-vm.html ?
That really only has an effect no tables that aren't updated very often. Unless you've got a whole bunch of those, it's not that big of a deal. -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance