On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 11:10 AM, Scott Whitney<swhitney@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I'd like to phone in with a slightly different opinion on VACUUM FULL. Yeah, > it should be avoided when possible, but it's not always possible. In our > case, I've got 300ish databases backing to a single database server. Each of > those dbs has a couple of hundred tables and a hundred or more views. The > product (Journyx Timesheet) is pretty complex, and I find that if I do _not_ > perform a full vacuum once per week, my customer dbs start to slow down > inordinately. Queries which would run in 1-2 seconds will run in 30-40 > seconds after a few weeks of not performing a full vacuum. Wait, full vacuum on the whole db, or vacuum full? > I've got autovac > running on all dbs. > > Now, that could well be due to index bloat with complex indexes, or it could > be due to a variety of other factors, but also my pg_clog directory does not > clear out, but continues to create new clog segments. Running my weekly > vac-full-analyze resolves that problem for me. This might not be the case > for you if you have a less complex schema, especially noting how you say you > use it. You likely have very long running transactions. Look for idle in transaction queries in the pg_stat_activity table. It may be that right now vacuum full is the only fix but if you can identify a reason regular vacuum isn't working you could eliminate the need for vacuum full. > I _think_ autovacuum, somewhere around early 8.x resolves the transaction > wrap-around issues, but someone else should verify that. Ayup. -- Sent via pgsql-admin mailing list (pgsql-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-admin
