Re: tuning autovacuum - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: tuning autovacuum
Date
Msg-id 16306.1307655717@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: tuning autovacuum  (Greg Smith <greg@2ndQuadrant.com>)
Responses Re: tuning autovacuum
List pgsql-hackers
Greg Smith <greg@2ndQuadrant.com> writes:
> What we'd probably need to do with those is handle them like the other 
> stats in the system:  store a total number for visited/cleaned/dead for 
> each relation, then increment the total as each vacuum finishes.

As Robert said, we're already seeing scalability problems with the
pg_stats subsystem.  I'm not eager to add a bunch more per-table
counters, at least not without some prior work to damp down the ensuing
performance hit.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Noah Misch
Date:
Subject: Re: On-the-fly index tuple deletion vs. hot_standby
Next
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: Postmaster holding unlinked files for pg_largeobject table