Alex
On 6/9/06, Jim C. Nasby <
jnasby@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
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
