Re: Question about VACUUM - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Ernesto Quiñones
Subject Re: Question about VACUUM
Date
Msg-id CAMB2kH5gOudkM-UyO3ie_WfHi8PprrdAMHU_L-4eUyp+K7UN2Q@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Question about VACUUM  (Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-performance
no problem Scott, thanks for your appreciations



2011/12/5 Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>:
> On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 10:42 AM, Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 10:19 AM, Ernesto Quiñones <ernestoq@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> vacuum_cost_delay       1s
>>> vacuum_cost_limit       200
>>
>> Those are insane settings for vacuum costing, even on a very slow
>> machine.  Basically you're starving vacuum and autovacuum so much that
>> they can never keep up.
>
> sorry, the word I meant there was pathological.  No insult intended.



--
----------------------------------------------------------
Visita : http://www.eqsoft.net
----------------------------------------------------------
Sigueme en Twitter : http://www.twitter.com/ernestoq

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Scott Marlowe
Date:
Subject: Re: Question about VACUUM
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade