On Mié 11 Jul 2001 20:49, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > On Mi? 11 Jul 2001 13:46, Ryan Mahoney wrote:
> > > Hi Mark, This is being worked on now. I believe the 7.2 release will
> > > have enable you to run a vacuum with no downtime.
> >
> > AFAIK, if UNDO is implemented, no vacuum will be needed to fr
On Wed, Jul 11, 2001 at 03:55:46PM -0600, Mark wrote:
:
: 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
:
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 unn
Hi Mark, This is being worked on now. I believe the 7.2 release will have
enable you to run a vacuum with no downtime.
-r
At 03:39 PM 7/11/01 -0600, Mark wrote:
>Is Postgresql ready for 24/7 uptime? Our tests have shown that vacuumdb
>requires downtime, and if one does this nightly as sugge
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 mainte
