Reason we dont turn on autovacuum is that we are a "high-volume" insert shop with minimal updates..We have about 200 million inserts and a few thousand updates only. Most tables are partitions and get dropped as part of the purge. Hence..autovacuum is a waste of resources. However...the XID issue will force the need for an autovacuum at some point..hence we do it as a one-off occasionally. 2009/8/11 Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@xxxxxxxxx>: > 2009/8/11 Anj Adu <fotographs@xxxxxxxxx>: >> So..we dont have to check the last XID value per table ? >> >> we have a very high volume data warehouse for which autovacuum is not >> suitable due to performance reasons. Can we track the last XID on a >> per-table basis ? > > autovacuum is highly tunable so as to remove the burden of running it > and having it suck up all your IO mid day. Are you saying that no > amount of autovacuum tuning can fix the overhead issues of autovac, or > that you've just decided not to use it on principle? > > Assuming you do the load at night, vacuum after load, no updates > during the day, I can totally see just turning off autovacuum, but > sometimes it nice to leave it on set to some very low load (i.e. > autovacuum_vacuum_cost_delay=20ms) so that should you forget about > some table, you won't get caught out by table bloat but also won't > have autovacuum killing IO midday. > > Just a thought. > > Either way, autovacuum WILL kick in if it has to to fix a wrap around > issue even if it's turned off. > -- Sent via pgsql-admin mailing list (pgsql-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-admin
