I dont understand vacuum a lot.. I admit I am stupid :-)
When you say scanned... do you mean reads or do you mean writes?
Since its really writes that I am having trouble.. the auto vacuum
message tells me 11 pages were removed and so many tuples were
removed.. I am guessing its writes.
I can try vacuuming that table before it starts the run to see it can
avoid that..
-Jignesh
Tom Lane wrote:
> "Jignesh K. Shah" <J.K.Shah@Sun.COM> writes:
>
>> So from the PostgreSQL view things are doing fine based on outputs: I
>> need to figure out the Solaris view on it now.
>>
>
>
>> Could it be related to autovacuum happening also?
>>
>
> Maybe ... have you tried fiddling with the vacuum_cost_delay options?
>
> Looking at the autovacuum log output,
>
>
>> 2007-11-13 09:21:19.830 PST 9458 LOG: automatic vacuum of table
>> "specdb.public.txn_log_table": index scans: 1
>> pages: 11 removed, 105 remain
>> tuples: 3147 removed, 40 remain
>> system usage: CPU 0.11s/0.09u sec elapsed 6.02 sec
>>
>
> it seems like a serious omission that this gives you no hint how many
> pages were scanned.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
