Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PORTS] vacuum takes too long - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PORTS] vacuum takes too long
Date
Msg-id 199901071749.MAA07078@candle.pha.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to RE: [HACKERS] Re: [PORTS] vacuum takes too long  ("Jackson, DeJuan" <djackson@cpsgroup.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PORTS] vacuum takes too long  (The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org>)
List pgsql-hackers
> With MVCC an occasional 'vacuum analyze' should only be noticed from the
> performance improvements.  As far as I can tell most of the work done by
> an analyze is in reading the table data.  If you make sure to write the
> new information at the end of the transaction you only lock the indexes
> for the amount of time it takes to write them.
>
> I see a 'vacuum analyze' being less of a problem than 'vacuum'.
> Any of you experts can contradict my assumptions.

The problem is that vacuum analyze does both vacuum and analyze.
Analyze takes so long, we figured we might as well vacuum too.  Maybe we
need to change that.


--
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle
  maillist@candle.pha.pa.us            |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Jackson, DeJuan"
Date:
Subject: RE: [HACKERS] Re: [PORTS] vacuum takes too long
Next
From: "Thomas G. Lockhart"
Date:
Subject: Outer Joins (and need CASE help)