> 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
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
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
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
> 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