Aggressive autovacuuming ?

From: Jesper Krogh
Subject: Aggressive autovacuuming ?
Date: ,
Msg-id: 4C1E537D.5030904@krogh.cc
(view: Whole thread, Raw)
Responses: Re: Aggressive autovacuuming ?  (Scott Marlowe)
Re: Aggressive autovacuuming ?  ("Kevin Grittner")
List: pgsql-performance

Tree view

Aggressive autovacuuming ?  (Jesper Krogh, )
 Re: Aggressive autovacuuming ?  (Scott Marlowe, )
  Re: Aggressive autovacuuming ?  (Alvaro Herrera, )
  Re: Aggressive autovacuuming ?  (Robert Haas, )
   Re: Aggressive autovacuuming ?  (Scott Marlowe, )
    Re: Aggressive autovacuuming ?  (Robert Haas, )
 Re: Aggressive autovacuuming ?  ("Kevin Grittner", )

Hi.

I have been wondering if anyone has been experimenting with "really
agressive"
autovacuuming. The database I'm adminstrating rarely have "long running"
transactions
(over several minutes). And a fair amount of buffercache and an OS cache of
(at best 64GB). A lot of the OS cache is being used for read-caching.

My thought was that if I tuned autovacuum to be "really aggressive" then
I could get autovacuum to actually vacuum the tuples before they
get evicted from the OS cache thus effectively "saving" the IO-overhead
of vacuuming.

The largest consequence I can see at the moment is that when I get a
full vacuum (for preventing transaction-id wraparound) it would be
run with the same aggressive settings, thus giving a real performance
hit in that situation.

Has anyone tried to do similar? What is your experience?
Is the idea totally bogus?

Jesper

--
Jesper Krogh


pgsql-performance by date:

From: Scott Marlowe
Date:
Subject: Re: Obtaining the exact size of the database.
From: "Jatinder Sangha"
Date:
Subject: Re: HashAggregate slower than sort?