Bloat doesn't depend on your update/delete rate; it depends on how many update/deletes occur between vacuums. Long running transactions also come into play. As for performance, a P4 with 512M of ram is pretty much a toy in the database world; it wouldn't be very hard to swamp it. But without actual details there's no way to know. On Wed, Jun 07, 2006 at 10:52:26PM +0200, Antoine wrote: > Hi all and thanks for your responses. I haven't yet had a chance to > tweak the autovac settings but I really don't think that things can be > maxing out even the default settings. > We have about 4 machines that are connected 24/7 - they were doing > constant read/inserts (24/7) but that was because the code was > rubbish. I managed to whinge enough to get the programme to read, do > the work, then insert, and that means they are accessing (connected > but idle) for less than 5% of the day. We have about another 10 > machines that access (reads and updates) from 8-5. It is running on a > P4 with 256 or 512meg of ram and I simply refuse to believe this load > is anything significant... :-(. > There are only two tables that see any action, and the smaller one is > almost exclusively inserts. > Much as I believe it shouldn't be possible the ratio of 5:1 for the db > vs fresh copy has given me a taste for a copy/drop scenario... > I will try and increase settings and keep you posted. > Cheers > Antoine > > > -- > This is where I should put some witty comment. > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster > -- Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117 vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461
