Re: VACUUM vs. REINDEX - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Joshua D. Drake
Subject Re: VACUUM vs. REINDEX
Date
Msg-id 200607072024.25142.jd@commandprompt.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: VACUUM vs. REINDEX  ("Chris Hoover" <revoohc@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-performance
> William,
>
> You need to increase your fsm settings.  The database is telling you it is
> trying to store 177K+ pages, but you have only provided it with 20K.  Since
> these pages are cheap, I would set your fsm up with at least the following.
>
> max_fsm_pages 500000
> max_fsm_relations 5000
>
> This should provide PostgreSQL with enough space to work.  You still might
> need to run one more vacuum full once you change the setting so that you
> can recover the space that was lost due to your fsm begin to small.
Yes he will need to run a vacuum full but I actually doubt he needs to
increase his max_fsm_pages that much, he just needs to vacuum more.

Joshua D. Drake

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: "Chris Hoover"
Date:
Subject: Re: VACUUM vs. REINDEX
Next
From: "Steinar H. Gunderson"
Date:
Subject: Re: VACUUM vs. REINDEX