Re: problems with new vacuum (??) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: problems with new vacuum (??)
Date
Msg-id 200201021812.g02IC3q09418@candle.pha.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: problems with new vacuum (??)  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote:
> Barry Lind <barry@xythos.com> writes:
> > But while this vacuum was running the rest of the system was performing 
> > very poorly.  Opperations that usually are subsecond, where taking 
> > minutes to complete.
> 
> Is this any different from the behavior of 7.1 vacuum?  Also, what
> platform are you on?
> 
> I've noticed on a Linux 2.4 box (RH 7.2, typical commodity-grade PC
> hardware) that vacuum, pgbench, or almost any I/O intensive operation
> drives interactive performance into the ground.  I have not had an
> opportunity to try to characterize the problem, but I suspect Linux's
> disk I/O scheduler is not bright enough to prioritize interactive
> operations.

Just as a data point, I have not seen pgbench dramatically affect
performance on BSD/OS.  Interactive sessions are just slightly slower
when then need to access the disk.

--  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: problems with new vacuum (??)
Next
From: Holger Krug
Date:
Subject: Re: Feature proposal: generalizing deferred trigger events