|
From my experience, you want to really tighten the autovacuum_analyze parameters. I recommend our users to use: autovacuum_analyze_threshold = 1 autovacuum_analyze_scale_factor = 0.0 Analyze is quite cheap, and the speed difference between an optimal and a suboptimal plans are usually pretty big. My 2c, Igor -----Original Message----- Thanks for the response! * We are on version 9.5.6 * Less than 10% of the table was updated today (between the time of the last reindex to when performance deteriorated) * autovacuum is on. I don't see an autoanalyze property in config but these are the settings for analyze
/autovacuum_analyze_threshold = 3000 # min number of row updates before
analyze #autovacuum_vacuum_scale_factor = 0.2 # fraction of table size before vacuum #autovacuum_analyze_scale_factor = 0.1 # fraction of table size before analyze #autovacuum_freeze_max_age = 200000000 # maximum XID age before forced vacuum # (change requires restart)/ * And this #gin_pending_list_limit = 4MB * gin_clean_pending_list() is not available. Will play with gin_pending_list_limit and see what that does.
Thanks! RV -- View this message in context:
http://www.postgresql-archive.org/Table-not-using-tsvector-gin-index-and-performance-much-worse-than-when-it-uses-it-tp5954485p5954503.html Sent from the PostgreSQL - performance mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance |
