Excerpts from Scott Marlowe's message of dom jun 20 16:13:15 -0400 2010: > On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 11:44 AM, Jesper Krogh <jesper@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi. > > > > I have been wondering if anyone has been experimenting with "really > > agressive" > > autovacuuming. > > I have been using moderately aggressive autovac, with 6 or more > threads running with 1ms sleep, then keeping track of them to see if > they're being too aggresive. Basically as long as io utilization > doesn't hit 100% it doesn't seem to have any negative or even > noticeable effect. Keep in mind that autovacuum scales down the cost limit the more workers there are. So if you have 10ms sleeps and 1 worker, it should roughly use a similar amount of I/O than if you have 10ms sleeps and 10 workers (each worker would sleep 10 times more frequently). -- Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
