Re: Patches with vacuum fixes available for 7.0.x - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: Patches with vacuum fixes available for 7.0.x
Date
Msg-id 200101241437.JAA18249@candle.pha.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Patches with vacuum fixes available for 7.0.x  (Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net>)
Responses Re: Patches with vacuum fixes available for 7.0.x
List pgsql-hackers
Here is another open item.  What are we doing with LAZY vacuum?  

> We recently had a very satisfactory contract completed by
> Vadim.
> 
> Basically Vadim has been able to reduce the amount of time
> taken by a vacuum from 10-15 minutes down to under 10 seconds.
> 
> We've been running with these patches under heavy load for
> about a week now without any problems except one:
>   don't 'lazy' (new option for vacuum) a table which has just
>   had an index created on it, or at least don't expect it to
>   take any less time than a normal vacuum would.
> 
> There's three patchsets and they are available at:
> 
> http://people.freebsd.org/~alfred/vacfix/
> 
> complete diff:
> http://people.freebsd.org/~alfred/vacfix/v.diff
> 
> only lazy vacuum option to speed up index vacuums:
> http://people.freebsd.org/~alfred/vacfix/vlazy.tgz
> 
> only lazy vacuum option to only scan from start of modified
> data:
> http://people.freebsd.org/~alfred/vacfix/mnmb.tgz
> 
> Although the patches are for 7.0.x I'm hoping that they
> can be forward ported (if Vadim hasn't done it already)
> to 7.1.
> 
> enjoy!
> 
> -- 
> -Alfred Perlstein - [bright@wintelcom.net|alfred@freebsd.org]
> "I have the heart of a child; I keep it in a jar on my desk."
> 


--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610)
853-3000+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026
 


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: AW: Postgresql on win32
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] rules on INSERT can't UPDATE new instance?