> That last message prints tups_vacuumed, but those other ones are counting
> all the removed item pointers. So apparently Gordon had a whole lot of
> pre-existing DEAD item pointers. I wonder why ...
Perhaps this will help. Here's the entire test.
Start with a newly loaded table with 5,063,4
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> Excerpts from Brad Nicholson's message of vie ago 06 12:01:27 -0400 2010:
>> It found 45878 dead tuples in 396 pages for the index authors_archive_pkey.
>> It found 16558 dead tuples in 492 pages for the table authors_archive.
> But why did it choose to skip the rest of t
Yes, and also from the original post:
> 3 INFO: scanned index "authors_archive_pkey" to remove 45878 row
> versions
> 4 DETAIL: CPU 0.05s/0.34u sec elapsed 0.41 sec.
> 5 INFO: "authors_archive": removed 45878 row versions in 396 pages
> 6 DETAIL: CPU 0.00s/0.00u sec elapsed 0.00 sec.
Lin
Excerpts from Brad Nicholson's message of vie ago 06 12:01:27 -0400 2010:
> On 10-08-06 11:45 AM, Gordon Shannon wrote:
> > OK, so if it knew that all vacuumable tuples could be found in 492 pages,
> > and
> > it scanned only those pages, then how could it be that it reports 16558
> > removable
On 10-08-06 11:45 AM, Gordon Shannon wrote:
OK, so if it knew that all vacuumable tuples could be found in 492 pages, and
it scanned only those pages, then how could it be that it reports 16558
removable tuples from those 492 pages, when it has already reported earlier
that it removed 45878 tupl
OK, so if it knew that all vacuumable tuples could be found in 492 pages, and
it scanned only those pages, then how could it be that it reports 16558
removable tuples from those 492 pages, when it has already reported earlier
that it removed 45878 tuples -- a number we know in fact to be correct?
Gordon Shannon writes:
> Hi, Running 8.4.4 on Centos. A couple of these numbers don't make sense to
> me.
> (I added line numbers for reference)
> 11 INFO: "authors_archive": found 16558 removable, 7300 nonremovable row
> versions in 492 out of 51958 pages
The key point here is that vacuum on
Hi, Running 8.4.4 on Centos. A couple of these numbers don't make sense to
me.
(I added line numbers for reference)
1 vacuum verbose authors_archive;
2 INFO: vacuuming "public.authors_archive"
3 INFO: scanned index "authors_archive_pkey" to remove 45878 row versions
4 DETAIL: CPU 0.05s/0
