We increased shared memory in the linux kernel, which decreased the vacuumdb
time from 40 minutes to 14 minutes on a 450 mhz processor. We calculate that
on our dual 1ghz box with ghz ethernet san connection this will go down to
under 5 minutes. This is acceptable to us. Sorry about the unnecessary post.
On Wednesday 11 July 2001 15:39, Mark wrote:
> Is Postgresql ready for 24/7 uptime? Our tests have shown that vacuumdb
> requires downtime, and if one does this nightly as suggested, well, one has
> downtime, 40+ minutes in our case.
>
> My company wants to replace MS SQL Server with PostgreSQL, but we can't
> afford downtime to do database maintenance. Is it possible that we are
> doing something wrong?
>
> What are the plans for future versions of pgsql? Will vacuum be optomized
> or otherwise enhanced to execute more quickly and/or not lock tables?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mark
>
> PS
> I posted more details to the hackers list.
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/search.mpl
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
