On Wed, 12 Nov 2003, Reece Hart wrote:
> On Wed, 2003-11-12 at 09:04, jake johnson wrote:
>
> > I also posted about the performance increase of 7.4, but I think that
> > much of the difference you're seeing (because it's such a large
> > difference) is probably due to the cleanliness of a newly
ï
Are there any guidelines on how often one should do
a reindex?
- Original Message -
From:
Reece
Hart
To: scott.marlowe
Cc: pgsql-general
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2003 12:50
PM
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] More Praise for
7.4RC2
On Thu, 2003-11-13 at 10:09
On Thu, 2003-11-13 at 13:10, scott.marlowe wrote:
So, if your table is HIGHLY updated, you may need to run a plain vacuum
very often, and that's where the autovacuum daemon comes in handy. Just
set it to run every 30 minutes or so, and let it go. It should only
vacuum the tables that have
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Reece Hart) writes:
> On Thu, 2003-11-13 at 10:09, scott.marlowe wrote:
>
> Do you vacuum full every so often? If not, and if you've been overflowing
> your fsm, then your tables will just grow without shrinking.
> Also, index growth could be a problem.
>
> Hmm. I did
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ("Rick Gigger") writes:
> Are there any guidelines on how often one should do a reindex?
When you discover that performance is "sucking" because of table
growth that would be fixed by a reindex. Unfortunately, there's not
quite a "quick prescription" for how to discover that :-(
Hello!
> You can use the oid2name program in the contrib directory to kinda
> research which files are big under those trees and see if
> it's a table or
> index growth problem.
I found it a tedious operation, if you want to keep a check on growth of
your databases regularly. So I wrote a l
On Friday 14 November 2003 01:33, Rick Gigger wrote:
> Are there any guidelines on how often one should do a reindex?
Vacuum in 7.4 does take care of index bloat, much better than earlier
versions. So if you run autovacuum daemon with 7.4, then you can do away with
reindex.
Of course testing at
Reece Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, 2003-11-13 at 10:09, scott.marlowe wrote:
>
> > Do you vacuum full every so often? If not, and if you've been overflowing
> > your fsm, then your tables will just grow without shrinking.
> > Also, index growth could be a problem.
>
>
> Hmm. I d
On Wed, 2003-11-12 at 09:04, jake johnson wrote:
I also posted about the performance increase of 7.4, but I think that
much of the difference you're seeing (because it's such a large
difference) is probably due to the cleanliness of a newly restored
database from backup.
I agree that this s
Actually, in your case it's probably the new optimisation regarding the use
of IN (subquery). They're now optimised to the same lavel as EXISTS IIRC.
On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 05:46:23PM -0800, Reece Hart wrote:
> On Wed, 2003-11-12 at 09:04, jake johnson wrote:
>
> > I also posted about the perfo
More praise for 7.4RC2:
I've installed 7.4RC2 and restored a fairly complex 20GB database (from 7.3.4) with ~75M rows in 30 tables and 4 schemas, numerous triggers and constraints, procs in plpgsql and plperl. To say that it all works great hugely underestimates the improvements. Thank you! Gr
11 matches
Mail list logo
