Phoenix Kiula escribió: > On 13/09/2007, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Mike Charnoky wrote: > > > > > Alvaro: The cluster suggestion probably won't help in my case since data > > > in the table should already be naturally ordered by date. > > > > It's not helpful only for reordering, but also for getting rid of dead > > tuples. > > Apart from creating a new table, indexing it, then renaming it to > original table -- is there an alternative to CLUSTER that doesn't > impose a painful ACCESS EXCLUSIVE lock on the table? We are on > Postgres 8.2.3 and have a heavy duty table that starts showing its > limits after a week or so. Autovacuum is on and working. FSM etc is > fine, maintenance_work_mem is 256MB. But cluster still takes upwards > of 30 minutes, which is unacceptable downtime for our web service. > Thanks for any tips! How large is this table, and how frequently is it updated? -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.amazon.com/gp/registry/DXLWNGRJD34J "El Maquinismo fue proscrito so pena de cosquilleo hasta la muerte" (Ijon Tichy en Viajes, Stanislaw Lem) ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org/
