This tells me that you need to be vacuuming more. Autovac is your friend. On Thu, Jun 08, 2006 at 07:14:01PM -0400, Alex Turner wrote: > Yeah - I just did a reindex, that fixed the indexes at least. > > Alex > > On 6/8/06, Jim C. Nasby <jnasby@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > >On Thu, Jun 08, 2006 at 06:03:23PM -0400, Alex Turner wrote: > >> I hope I'm reading this query wrong: > >> > >> trend=# select relname, relpages*8192/reltuples from pg_class where > >> reltuples>0 order by relpages desc limit 10; > >> relname | ?column? > >> -------------------------------+------------------ > >> property | 19935.4468376195 > >> result_entry_pkey | 1611.15654062026 > >> result_entry | 1417.71707157196 > >> person | 7107.41684585612 > >> property_feature_pkey | 98.7810833557521 > >> property_feature | 60.2035684051268 > >> person_name_i | 3358.93641334398 > >> property_price_i | 1978.89907374882 > >> property_mls_listing_number_i | 1923.61833274788 > >> property_spatial | 1784.73493686332 > >> (10 rows) > >> > >> If I have this query right in my head, this means that the average tuple > >in > >> the property relation is taking up 19k? and the average tuple in the > >> result_entry_pkey index is take 1.5k?! > >> > >> Is there a way I can get the database to coalesce free space? A vacuum > >> verbose shows that I have enough entries in the free space map... > > > >A lazy vacuum won't reclaim empty space, only a VACUUM FULL will. > > > >If that drops the size of the relations substantially, you'll probably > >want to REINDEX everything to reclaim lost space in the indexes as well. > >-- > >Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > >Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117 > >vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461 > > -- Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117 vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461
