Re: Vacuum daemon (pgvacuumd ?) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: Vacuum daemon (pgvacuumd ?)
Date
Msg-id 200203060301.g2631kP19379@candle.pha.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Vacuum daemon (pgvacuumd ?)  (mlw <markw@mohawksoft.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
> Is the number of deleted tuples sufficient to decide priority on vacuum? My
> thinking is that the tables with the most deleted tuples is the table which
> need most vacuum. Should ratio of deleted tuples vs total tuples or just count
> of deleted tuples. I am thinking ratio, but maybe it need be tunable.

Deleted or updated.  Both expire tuples.  Also, the old tuples can't be
vacuumed until no other transaction is viewing them as active.

> (4) If the tables eligible to be vacuumed have deleted tuples which exceed
> acceptable limits, vacuum them.

Seems you will measure in percentages, right?

--  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: Do we still have locking problems with concurrent users
Next
From: Neil Conway
Date:
Subject: Re: Do we still have locking problems with concurrent