On 5/7/20 6:34 AM, Ashish Chugh wrote:
Hi Ravi,
Thanks for your reply. One more query from our side.
To improve performance and release index space from database, We are
running FULL Vacuum on monthly basis.
As I recently learned:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/1392022649.706483.1587523402642%40mail.yahoo.com
To release index space index without a FULL vacuum you need to REINDEX.
Look at the message above for more information.
On PostgreSQL website it is not recommended to run FULL Vacuum on
Production Database and this also requires long downtime along with huge
log space requirement.
What are the recommendations regarding vacuum. Can we run FULL Vacuum on
monthly basis or we should be running Online Auto Vacuum instead.
Regards,
Ashish
*From:*Ravi Krishna [mailto:srkrishna1@xxxxxxxxxxx]
*Sent:* Wednesday, May 06, 2020 9:07 PM
*To:* Ashish Chugh <ashish.chugh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
*Cc:* pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Ram Pratap Maurya
<ram.maurya@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
*Subject:* Re: Abnormal Growth of Index Size - Index Size 3x large than
table size.
On May 6, 2020, at 10:52 AM, Ashish Chugh
<ashish.chugh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:ashish.chugh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
Hello Ravi,
Total number of indexes are 10 and size is 65 GB. Shall we consider
this as a normal scenario or we need to look into the growth of the
indexes as this is increasing day by day and table data is not
increasing so drastically. Due to this performance degradation is
there and we have to run full vacuum on monthly basis.
Table size is only 25 gb.
Any help in this regard is appreciable.
Indexes are stored just like tables. From storage perspective there is
no difference between a table and an index.
So the sum of 10 different tables to 65GB, compared to 25GB of one table
sounds possible.
--
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@xxxxxxxxxxx
