Re: [GENERAL] 7.3.4 on Linux: UPDATE .. foo=foo+1 degrades massivly

2004-04-26 Thread Guy Fraser
Philipp Buehler wrote: On 22/04/2004, Guy Fraser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote To [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Shouldn't the Database server be the entity that decides when vacuum is needed? How is the database supposed to know when you want to purge records? Once a vacuum has been run, the table can n

Re: [GENERAL] 7.3.4 on Linux: UPDATE .. foo=foo+1 degrades massivly

2004-04-22 Thread Guy Fraser
Dann Corbit wrote: A following VACCUM brings back return times to 'start' - but I cannot run VACUUM any other minute (?). And it exactly vaccums as many tuples as I updated.. sure thing: Why not? You only have to vacuum this one table. Vacuuming it once a minute

[GENERAL] 7.3.4 on Linux: UPDATE .. foo=foo+1 degrades massivly over time

2004-04-21 Thread Philipp Buehler
Hello, postgresql 7.3.4 on Debian or the redhat packaged 7.3.4-8 on RHEL AS3 - same issue, so I somewhat cut out RH is playing things on me. Tested on two different PCs, too (say, one debian, one RHEL). While running UPDATE banner SET counterhalf=counterhalf+1 WHERE BannerID=50 several thousand t