Re: Database size Vs performance degradation - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Fernando Ike
Subject Re: Database size Vs performance degradation
Date
Msg-id 1ed3e91a0808031651n4f3ab56ah632a9544a61f22f6@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Database size Vs performance degradation  (Matthew Wakeling <matthew@flymine.org>)
List pgsql-performance
2008/8/1 Matthew Wakeling <matthew@flymine.org>:
> On Thu, 31 Jul 2008, Andrzej Zawadzki wrote:
>>
>> Maybe I'm wrong but if this "bulk insert and delete" process is cyclical
>> then You don't need vacuum full.
>> Released tuples will fill up again with fresh data next day - after
>> regular vacuum.
>
> Yes, a regular manual vacuum will prevent the table from growing more than
> it needs to. However, a vacuum full is required to actually reduce the size
> of the table from 7.5G to 2.7G if that hasn't been done on the production
> system already.

    One good possibility is use pg8.3 for fix problem. Enable
Autovacuum+HOT was won a significant performance compared with 8.2 and
minor versions. :)



Kind Regards,
--
Fernando Ike
http://www.midstorm.org/~fike/weblog

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Matthew Wakeling
Date:
Subject: Re: Database size Vs performance degradation
Next
From: "H. Hall"
Date:
Subject: Re: SSD Performance Article