In response to tomrevam <tomer@xxxxxxxxx>: > My apologies, I should have asked for the output of VACUUM VERBOSE on the problem table in conjunction with these settings. (make sure you do VACUUM VERBOSE when the table is exhibiting the speed problem) > > Bill Moran wrote: > > > > The OP did mention that he's using autovac, which will take care of > > both vacuum and analyze for him. However, he didn't provide his > > autovac config, and it happens at times that the defaults are not > > aggressive enough to keep a table well-maintained. > > > > Here are my autovac configuration parameters. I played around with them to > make autovac work frequently. > > #autovacuum = on > log_autovacuum_min_duration = 0 > autovacuum_max_workers = 10 > autovacuum_naptime = 10s > autovacuum_vacuum_threshold = 2000 > autovacuum_analyze_threshold = 2000 > autovacuum_vacuum_scale_factor = 0.0005 > autovacuum_analyze_scale_factor = 0.0005 > #autovacuum_freeze_max_age = 200000000 > #autovacuum_vacuum_cost_delay = 20 > -- > View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/query-is-taking-longer-time-after-a-while-tp25661219p25675635.html > Sent from the PostgreSQL - general mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > -- > Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general -- Bill Moran http://www.potentialtech.com http://people.collaborativefusion.com/~wmoran/ -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
