Re: Vacuum-full very slow - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Simon Riggs
Subject Re: Vacuum-full very slow
Date
Msg-id 1177572075.4934.42.camel@silverbirch.site
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Vacuum-full very slow  (Listmail <lists@peufeu.com>)
List pgsql-general
On Thu, 2007-04-26 at 00:13 +0200, Listmail wrote:
> By the way, about indexes :
>
>         When you have a small table (say, for a website, maybe a few
> tens of
> megabytes max...) reindexing it takes just a few seconds, maybe
> 10-20
> seconds.
>         It could be interesting, performance-wise, to tell postgres
> not to bother
> about crash-survivability of indexes on this table. Like temporary
> tables.
> Write nothing to WAL. If it crashes, on recovery, postgres would
> reindex
> the table.
>         btree indexing is so fast on postgres that I'd definitely use
> this
> feature.
>         I'd rather trade a minute of recovery versus less disk IO for
> index
> update.
>
>         You could even do that for whole tables (like, web sessions
> table) which
> hold "perishable" data...

That optimisation on mine/Heikki's todo for the next release.

In some cases it can speed up recovery, as well as mainline performance.

--
  Simon Riggs
  EnterpriseDB   http://www.enterprisedb.com



pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: "A. Kretschmer"
Date:
Subject: Re: Business days
Next
From: "pobox@verysmall.org"
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_connect sometimes works sometimes not