Stefano Dal Pra escribió: > Your first post says vacuum goes worse (slower). > I see that you do not issue the -f option (FULL VACUUM). > > I had a similar situation with a server (with frequent update) > performing nightly vacuumdb. After a few many days it went > slower and slower. When you have that problem, the solution is to issue more plain vacuum (not full) more frequently. If it's a highly updated table, then maybe once per hour or more. It depends on the update rate. > With psql 8.2.x we adopted pg_autovacuum which seems to perform good, > even thought > i do not clearly understand whether it occasionally performs a full > vacuum (i think he does'nt). It doesn't because it's normally not necessary. Also, we don't want to be acquiring exclusive locks in a background automatic process, so if you really need vacuum full (and I question your need to) then you must issue it yourself. -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
