On Fri, Mar 23, 2007 at 04:37:32PM +0100, Dimitri wrote:
Speed-up x4 is obtained just because single vacuum process reaching max
80MB/sec in throughput
I'd look at trying to improve that, it seems very low.
Mike Stone
---(end of broadcast)---
TI
On Thursday 22 March 2007 19:46, Michael Stone wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 22, 2007 at 07:24:38PM +0100, Dimitri wrote:
> >you're right until you're using a single disk :)
> >Now, imagine you have more disks
>
> I do have more disks. I maximize the I/O performance by dedicating
> different sets of disks t
On Thu, Mar 22, 2007 at 07:24:38PM +0100, Dimitri wrote:
you're right until you're using a single disk :)
Now, imagine you have more disks
I do have more disks. I maximize the I/O performance by dedicating
different sets of disks to different tables. YMMV. I do suggest watching
your I/O rates
Mike,
you're right until you're using a single disk :)
Now, imagine you have more disks - more I/O operations you may perform, and
you'll need also a CPU time to process them :) until you fully use one CPU
per 'vacuumdb' - and then you stop...
As well, even in case when CPU is not highly us
On Thu, Mar 22, 2007 at 04:55:02PM +0100, Dimitri wrote:
In my case I have several CPU on the server and quite powerful storage box
which is not really busy with a single vacuum. So, my idea is quite simple -
speed-up vacuum with parallel execution (just an algorithm):
Vacuum is I/O intensive,
Dimitri escribió:
> But of course it will be much more cool to have something like:
>
>vacuumdb -a -P parallel_degree
>
> What do you think? ;)
I think our time is better spent enhancing autovacuum ... but if you
feel like improving vacuumdb, be my guest. This discussion belongs into
pgsql
On Thursday 22 March 2007 16:12, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Dimitri escribió:
> > On Thursday 22 March 2007 14:52, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > > Dimitri escribió:
> > > > Folks,
> > > >
> > > > is there any constrains/problems/etc. to run several vacuum processes
> > > > in parallel while each one is 'v
Dimitri escribió:
> On Thursday 22 March 2007 14:52, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > Dimitri escribió:
> > > Folks,
> > >
> > > is there any constrains/problems/etc. to run several vacuum processes in
> > > parallel while each one is 'vaccuming' one different table?
> >
> > No, no problem. Keep in mind
On Thursday 22 March 2007 14:52, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Dimitri escribió:
> > Folks,
> >
> > is there any constrains/problems/etc. to run several vacuum processes in
> > parallel while each one is 'vaccuming' one different table?
>
> No, no problem. Keep in mind that if one of them takes a very l
Dimitri escribió:
> Folks,
>
> is there any constrains/problems/etc. to run several vacuum processes in
> parallel while each one is 'vaccuming' one different table?
No, no problem. Keep in mind that if one of them takes a very long
time, the others will not be able to remove dead tuples that we
Folks,
is there any constrains/problems/etc. to run several vacuum processes in
parallel while each one is 'vaccuming' one different table?
Example:
vacuum -d db1 -t table1 &
vacuum -d db1 -t table2 &
vacuum -d db1 -t table3 &
wait
(sorry if it was already asked, but I did not find an e
11 matches
Mail list logo
