I have a postgres server for which du reports
1188072 /var/lib/postgresql/8.2/main
on Linux system.
The server has only one real database, which is for bacula. When I dump
the database, it's 73Mg.
This is immediately after I did a full vacuum and restarted the server.
Also,
bacula=> SELECT reln
Ross Boylan wrote:
I have a postgres server for which du reports
1188072 /var/lib/postgresql/8.2/main
on Linux system.
The server has only one real database, which is for bacula. When I dump
the database, it's 73Mg.
This is immediately after I did a full vacuum and restarted the server.
Also,
On Sun, 2008-03-30 at 20:27 +0200, Joris Dobbelsteen wrote:
> Ross Boylan wrote:
> > I have a postgres server for which du reports
> > 1188072 /var/lib/postgresql/8.2/main
> > on Linux system.
> > The server has only one real database, which is for bacula. When I dump
> > the database, it's
Ross Boylan wrote:
On Sun, 2008-03-30 at 20:27 +0200, Joris Dobbelsteen wrote:
Ross Boylan wrote:
I have a postgres server for which du reports
1188072 /var/lib/postgresql/8.2/main
on Linux system.
The server has only one real database, which is for bacula. When I dump
the database, i
Ross Boylan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> reindexing had a huge effect.
So the indexes were indeed bloated. There are some known usage patterns
in which regular vacuum isn't very good at reclaiming space in b-tree
indexes. For example if you make daily entries in an index by date and
later remov
On Sun, 2008-03-30 at 21:22 +0200, Joris Dobbelsteen wrote:
> From the top contenders, about half are indexes, so you are stuck
> with
> ~200 MB of data in the tables.
> Postgresql has some wasted space due to placement of the tuples in a
> block and overhead for each block and row. I don't kno
>-Original Message-
>From: Ross Boylan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Sunday, 30 March 2008 23:43
>To: Joris Dobbelsteen
>Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
>Subject: Re: [GENERAL] database 1.2G, pg_dump 73M?!
>
>On Sun, 2008-03-30 at 21:22
On Sun, 2008-03-30 at 22:59 +0100, Joris Dobbelsteen wrote:
> >-Original Message-
> >From: Ross Boylan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Sent: Sunday, 30 March 2008 23:43
> >To: Joris Dobbelsteen
> >Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
> >
>-Original Message-
>From: Ross Boylan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Monday, 31 March 2008 0:23
>To: Joris Dobbelsteen
>Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
>Subject: RE: [GENERAL] database 1.2G, pg_dump 73M?!
>
>
>On Sun, 2008-03-30 at 22:
Ross Boylan wrote:
I'm not a DB admin; I only play one on my computer. I clearly need to
figure out how to get regular vacuum, analyze, and reindexing going (if
they aren't going already).
Thanks for all your help.
Ross
1. optimize your sql queries and 'understand' index usage,don't inde
> I am still trying to figure out if the database was getting any
> automatic vacuuming at all. The Postgres documentation (the database is
> 8.2, though I'm moving to 8.3 soon) sounds as if it's on automatically,
> but the Debian-specific documentation suggests I may need to do some
> additi
11 matches
Mail list logo