Re: When to do a vacuum for highly active table

From: Rigmor Ukuhe
Subject: Re: When to do a vacuum for highly active table
Date: ,
Msg-id: 20050830212545.5472718E718@linux.finestmedia.tv
(view: Whole thread, Raw)
In response to: When to do a vacuum for highly active table  (Markus Benne)
List: pgsql-performance

Tree view

When to do a vacuum for highly active table  (Markus Benne, )
 Re: When to do a vacuum for highly active table  (Tom Lane, )
  Re: When to do a vacuum for highly active table  (, )
   Re: When to do a vacuum for highly active table  (Tom Lane, )
 Re: When to do a vacuum for highly active table  (Chris Browne, )
 Re: When to do a vacuum for highly active table  ("Rigmor Ukuhe", )
 Re: When to do a vacuum for highly active table  (Chris Browne, )

> -----Original Message-----
> From:  [mailto:pgsql-performance-
> ] On Behalf Of Markus Benne
> Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2005 12:14 AM
> To: 
> Subject: [PERFORM] When to do a vacuum for highly active table
>
> We have a highly active table that has virtually all
> entries updated every 5 minutes.  Typical size of the
> table is 50,000 entries, and entries have grown fat.
>
> We are currently vaccuming hourly, and towards the end
> of the hour we are seeing degradation, when compared
> to the top of the hour.
>
> Vaccum is slowly killing our system, as it is starting
> to take up to 10 minutes, and load at the time of
> vacuum is 6+ on a Linux box.  During the vacuum,
> overall system is goin unresponsive, then comes back
> once vacuum completes.

Play with vacuum_cost_delay option. In our case it made BIG difference
(going from very heavy hitting to almost unnoticed vacuuming.)

Hope it helps.

Rigmor Ukuhe

>
> If we run vacuum less frequently, degradation
> continues to the point that we can't keep up with the
> throughput, plus vacuum takes longer anyway.
>
> Becoming quite a pickle:-)
>
> We are thinking of splitting the table in two: the
> part the updates often, and the part the updates
> infrequently as we suspect that record size impacts
> vacuum.
>
> Any ideas?
>
>
> Thanks,
> Mark
>
> -----------------
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster



pgsql-performance by date:

From: "J. Andrew Rogers"
Date:
Subject: Re: Postgresql Hardware - Recommendations
From: Kevin
Date:
Subject: Re: Advise about how to delete entries