On Tuesday November 14 2006 1:02 pm, Ed L. wrote: > On Tuesday November 14 2006 12:56 pm, Jim C. Nasby wrote: > > You don't have the vacuum cost delay settings set > > unreasonably high, do you? > > On Tuesday November 14 2006 12:56 pm, you wrote: > > You don't have the vacuum cost delay settings set > > unreasonably high, do you? > > I'm not sure. Here's what we're running: Well, I think we clearly have an HPUX CPU bottleneck (long pri queue, high cpu utilization, high user cpu %, lots of processes "blocked on pri"). It seems to get worst and slow all queries down across the board when autovac tries to vacuum a 15GB table. I'm guessing this is flushing the OS/DB caches, exacerbating the CPU bottleneck. I'm also not sure what to do about it beyond the customer buying some politically/financially expensive CPUs. The table in question appears to be the pathological case for vacuum: very large with lots of frequent UPDATEs. It's essentially a log table. So the other options seem to be figure out how to partition the table so as to minimize size of the data needing vacuuming, or to redesign if possible to replace UPDATEs with INSERTs. Other ideas? Ed
