Re: Is it ok to run vacuum full verbose command for live database for the tables which has more dead tuples? - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Raghavendra Rao J S V
Subject Re: Is it ok to run vacuum full verbose command for live database for the tables which has more dead tuples?
Date
Msg-id CAEHH7R6H8YH4r0XDB9GqW29+QWL0jWWb-X4rhPxCySzpEZp=QA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Is it ok to run vacuum full verbose command for live database forthe tables which has more dead tuples?  (Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@aklaver.com>)
Responses Re: Is it ok to run vacuum full verbose command for live database for the tables which has more dead tuples?  (Ron <ronljohnsonjr@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-general
Please find my inline comments.

On 18 July 2018 at 18:48, Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@aklaver.com> wrote:
On 07/18/2018 02:13 AM, Raghavendra Rao J S V wrote:
We have thousands of tables. But out of those tables, around 20 to 40 tables are always busy due to that those tables are bloating.

Define bloating?

​ Table contains more dead tuples more than 5000 records. Sometimes few tables may contains 50million records and size also in GB's. Refer below screen print.

 

 
In order to avoid this we are running a shell script which performs vacuum full on the tables which has more than ten thousand dead tuples.

Out of how many live tuples?

​Very less ​

While running this we are stopping all application processors and running vacuum full on the tables which has more dead tuples.

 1. Is it ok to run *vacuum full verbose* command for live database for
    the tables which has more dead tuples(greater than)?
 2. Does it cause any *adverse *effect?

​​
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/10/static/sql-vacuum.html


"FULL

    Selects “full” vacuum, which can reclaim more space, but takes much longer and exclusively locks the table. This method also requires extra disk space, since it writes a new copy of the table and doesn't release the old copy until the operation is complete. Usually this should only be used when a significant amount of space needs to be reclaimed from within the table.

​​

"



Please clarify me. Thanks in advance.

--
Regards,
Raghavendra Rao J S V



--
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@aklaver.com



--
Regards,
Raghavendra Rao J S V
Mobile- 8861161425
Attachment

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Adrien NAYRAT
Date:
Subject: Re: Shared buffers increased but cache hit ratio is still 85%
Next
From: Олег Самойлов
Date:
Subject: Incorrect description of the WITH CHECK in the row security can lead to the security issue