Re: Second attempt, roll your own autovacuum - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Richard Huxton
Subject Re: Second attempt, roll your own autovacuum
Date
Msg-id 4588094F.7070909@archonet.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Second attempt, roll your own autovacuum  (Csaba Nagy <nagy@ecircle-ag.com>)
Responses Re: Second attempt, roll your own autovacuum
List pgsql-general
Csaba Nagy wrote:
>
>> - One might have *two* consumers, one that will only process small
>>   tables, so that those little, frequently updated tables can get
>>   handled quickly, and another consumer that does larger tables.
>>   Or perhaps that knows that it's fine, between 04:00 and 09:00 UTC,
>>   to have 6 consumers, and blow through a lot of larger tables
>>   simultaneously.
>
> So one of the 2 might be enough. I guess time-based
> exclusion/permissions are not that easy to implement, and also not easy
> to set up properly... so what could work well is:

Alternatively, perhaps a threshold so that a table is only considered
for vacuum if:
   (table-size * overall-activity-in-last-hour) < threshold
Ideally you'd define your units appropriately so that you could just
define threshold in postgresql.conf as 30% (of peak activity in last 100
hours say).

--
   Richard Huxton
   Archonet Ltd

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Matthew O'Connor
Date:
Subject: Re: Let's play bash the search engine
Next
From: "Johann Campbell"
Date:
Subject: Re: Creating an Independant Application