I had thought that I had dropped and reloaded this
table but apparently I hadn't and I had set the
statistics target for one column to 500 while
experimenting. Resetting it to -1 and running with a
default of 300 gets ~ 70 megs memory footprint during
the analyze now.
Thanks Tom for indulging my
Shelby Cain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It still decided to sample 15 rows. Am I missing
> something obvious here? Shouldn't fewer rows be
> sampled when I set the collection target to 1?
The sample size is 300 rows times the largest per-column analysis
target, where default_statistics_tar
Currently my default is 300 (yes - very large I know)
but overriding default_statistics_target with a value
of 1 and re-running vacuum analyze on the same large
table results in no change in maximum memory
consumption during the process that I can see. It
should be noted that I see this behavior o
Shelby Cain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I apologize for my original post being unclear. I'm
> running "vacuum analyze" and seeing the behavior
> mentioned. Does specifying the analyze option imply
> "vacuum full"?
No; I just figured you were probably using FULL without saying so.
However ...
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thursday 25 March 2004 09:12 am, Shelby Cain wrote:
> I agree in principle that the solution is to run on a
> server with more memory instead of my local
> development box. However, I'm not going to be able to
> simply request that additional memor
I agree in principle that the solution is to run on a
server with more memory instead of my local
development box. However, I'm not going to be able to
simply request that additional memory be installed as
these are "standard" boxes that IT distributes to
employees.
Regardless, I'm more curious a
I apologize for my original post being unclear. I'm
running "vacuum analyze" and seeing the behavior
mentioned. Does specifying the analyze option imply
"vacuum full"?
On a hunch I just ran analyze and
the backend's memory usage soared up to 100+ megs. I
suspect that means it isn't the vacuum
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
How about plugging in more memory ?
40MB seems a bit low for a database server footprint - well, certainly depends
on what you do.
But if your machine starts swapping with an extra 40 MB of memory consumption
I'd say the machine is undersized for th
