AW: AW: [HACKERS] vacuum

2001-06-13 Thread Zeugswetter Andreas SB
> The other question is, what are your startup parameters? What sort of > shared memory buffer are you working with? I image that VACUUM does a > flush to disk, so are 1000 items filling your buffer(s), > causing an almost > continue fsync to disk for each INSERT after that ... so the VACUUM is

Re: AW: [HACKERS] vacuum

2001-06-13 Thread The Hermit Hacker
8k ... On Wed, 13 Jun 2001, Andy Samuel wrote: > The same question ... how's the size after you vacuum the tables/db ? > > > continuous UPDATEs happening to his table, no INSERTs, no DELETEs ... and > > his tables quicklky grow from a 8k table to 65Meg if there is no vacuum > > happening every

Re: AW: [HACKERS] vacuum

2001-06-13 Thread Andy Samuel
The same question ... how's the size after you vacuum the tables/db ? > continuous UPDATEs happening to his table, no INSERTs, no DELETEs ... and > his tables quicklky grow from a 8k table to 65Meg if there is no vacuum > happening every few *hours* ... TIA Andy ---(en

Re: AW: [HACKERS] vacuum

2001-06-13 Thread The Hermit Hacker
On Wed, 13 Jun 2001, Zeugswetter Andreas SB wrote: > > > Is there a relative consensus for how often to run vacuum? I have a > > table of about 8 columns that I fill with 100,000 items simply via a "\i > > alarms.sql". After 1,000 items or so it gets extremely slow to fill with > > data, and

AW: [HACKERS] vacuum

2001-06-13 Thread Zeugswetter Andreas SB
> Is there a relative consensus for how often to run vacuum? I have a > table of about 8 columns that I fill with 100,000 items simply via a "\i > alarms.sql". After 1,000 items or so it gets extremely slow to fill with > data, and will take over a day to fill the entire thing unless I run