Re: Vaccum Stalling - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Pavel Stehule
Subject Re: Vaccum Stalling
Date
Msg-id 162867790707100916t811d81fk2d73f600143e480f@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Vaccum Stalling  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Vaccum Stalling  ("Pavel Stehule" <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-general
Hello

I have similar problem with vacuum on 8.1

I have 256M table. pgstattuple reports 128M free. I stopped vacuum
after 1hour (maintenance_work_mem = 160M). I had not more time.

Regards
Pavel Stehule



2007/7/10, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>:
> Brad Nicholson <bnichols@ca.afilias.info> writes:
> > On Tue, 2007-07-10 at 11:19 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Oh, I forgot to mention --- you did check that vacuum_mem is set to
> >> a pretty high value, no?  Else you might be doing a lot more
> >> btbulkdelete scans than you need to.
>
> > What would you define as high for 7.4?  I bumped it up to ~ 245mbs
>
> That sounds like plenty --- you only need 6 bytes per dead tuple,
> so that should be enough to handle all your 15-20M dead tuples in
> one scan.
>
> How big is this index again?
>
>                         regards, tom lane
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?
>
>                http://archives.postgresql.org/
>

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Vaccum Stalling
Next
From: Andrew Sullivan
Date:
Subject: Re: PostGreSQL Replication