ציטוט Bill Moran:
In response to Herouth Maoz <herouth@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
Did I understand the original problem correctly? I thought you were saying
that _lack_ of analyzing was causing performance issues, and that running
vacuum analyze was taking too long and causing the interval between
analyze runs to be too long. If that is the case, then I still think
manually scheduling vacuum and analyze to run in separate threads is
the best approach.
Yes, I get the worst impact if autovacuum decides to do a vacuum analyze
rather than a separate vacuum and a separate analyze. However, normal
vacuum does cause a slowdown, though not as much as vacuum analyze.
If the problem is that overall performance slows too much when vacuum is
running, then you'll probably have to get more/faster hardware. Vacuum
has to run occasionally or your table will bloat. Bloated tables perform
lousy and waste a lot of space, and a table that is getting updates and
inserts without vacuuming will grow without bound, even if you delete
records. It's kind of like the trash bin on many desktop OSes ... when
you DELETE a record from the DB, it goes into the trash bin, when you
run VACUUM, the trash is emptied (Yes, I know that's not _exactly_ how
vacuum works, but I'm just drawing a parallel here)
I understand. Assuming that I have enough disk space, and I vacuum once
a day instead of every 20 minutes. Does that cause deterioration in
performance?
Thank you,
Herouth
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
