Re: "VACUUM FULL ANALYZE" vs. Autovacuum Contention - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Scott Marlowe
Subject Re: "VACUUM FULL ANALYZE" vs. Autovacuum Contention
Date
Msg-id CAOR=d=3tpFoT27g6U8nU1BPmyG0soA2UdNGfhv+69aq09MHWew@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to "VACUUM FULL ANALYZE" vs. Autovacuum Contention  (D C <ptradingcom@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-performance
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 2:30 PM, D C <ptradingcom@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> (Apologies for any possible duplication of this email.)
>
> (Also, apologies if this is an obvious question.  I have gone through the
> archives without seeing something that directly ties to this.)
>
> We are running Postgresql on a 64b RHEL5.2 64b server.  "Uname -a":
> --------------Linux xxxxxxx 2.6.18-92.el5 #1 SMP Tue Apr 29 13:16:15 EDT
> 2008 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
>
> We have autovacuum enabled with the following settings:
>
> autovacuum_naptime = 30s
> autovacuum_vacuum_threshold = 200
> autovacuum_vacuum_scale_factor = 0.5
> autovacuum_vacuum_cost_delay = 10
>
> In addition to autovacuuming, each day, early, in the morning, we run a full
> vacuum, like this: "vacuumdb --all --full --analyze".

Why?

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: D C
Date:
Subject: "VACUUM FULL ANALYZE" vs. Autovacuum Contention
Next
From: Greg Smith
Date:
Subject: Re: "VACUUM FULL ANALYZE" vs. Autovacuum Contention