Re: postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org
Date
Msg-id 19394.1047803852@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org  (Aaron Krowne <akrowne@vt.edu>)
Responses Re: postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org  (Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu>)
Re: postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org  (Max Baker <max@warped.org>)
Re: postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org  (Aaron Krowne <akrowne@vt.edu>)
List pgsql-performance
Aaron Krowne <akrowne@vt.edu> writes:
> So, either it is broken, or doing a VACUUM FULL ANALYZE rather than just
> VACUUM ANALYZE made all the difference.  Is this possible (the latter,
> we know the former is possible...)?

If your FSM parameters in postgresql.conf are too small, then plain
vacuums might have failed to keep up with the available free space,
leading to a situation where vacuum full is essential.  Did you happen
to notice whether the vacuum full shrunk the database's disk footprint
noticeably?

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Sean Chittenden
Date:
Subject: Re: postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org
Next
From: Joe Conway
Date:
Subject: Re: postgresql meltdown on PlanetMath.org