Hi All,
Okay, I'm getting a little further now. I'm about to create entries in the
pg_autovacuum system tables. However, I'm a little confused as to how I go
about finding out the OID value of the tables. The pg_autovacuum table
requires the OID of the table you want to create settings for
In fact, getting rid of vacuum full, or changing it to work like
cluster, has been proposed in the past. The use case really is pretty
narrow; cluster is a lot faster if there's a lot of unused space in the
table, and if there's not, vacuum full isn't going to do much so there's
not much point
Hi Tom,
Thanks for the suggestion. It's been a while since I replied to this as I
had to go and do some further investigation of the docs with regards the
autovacuum daemons configuration. According to the documentation, the
formula's for the vacuum and analyze are as follows:
Vacuum
Hi All,
I tried posting this last week but it has not come through yet, so please
excuse me if there is a double post.
We're having some issue's with the vacuum times within our database
environment, and would like some input from the guru's out there that could
potentially suggest a better
Bruce McAlister wrote:
Over time we have noticed increased response times from the database which
has an adverse affect on our registration times. After doing some research
it appears that this may have been related to our maintenance regime, and
has thus been amended as follows:
[1]
Hi Heikki,
Thanks for the reply.
The RAID array was implemented due to a projected growth pattern which
incorporate all 18 of our databases. The sizings I mentioned only refer to 1
of those databases, which, is also the most heavily used database :)
If I understand you correctly, we could in
Bruce McAlister [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[1] AutoVacuum runs during the day over the entire PostgreSQL cluster,
Good, but evidently you need to make it more aggressive.
[2] A Vacuum Full Verbose is run during our least busy period (generally
03:30) against the Database,
[3] A Re-Index on
Aidan Van Dyk wrote:
* Heikki Linnakangas [EMAIL PROTECTED] [070305 09:46]:
In fact, getting rid of vacuum full, or changing it to work like
cluster, has been proposed in the past. The use case really is pretty
narrow; cluster is a lot faster if there's a lot of unused space in the
table, and
* Heikki Linnakangas [EMAIL PROTECTED] [070305 09:46]:
If that is the case, why would anyone use the vacuum full approach if they
could use the cluster command on a table/database that will regen these
files for you. It almost seems like the vacuum full approach would, or
could, be