Re: count(*) performance - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Brendan Duddridge
Subject Re: count(*) performance
Date
Msg-id CE860B90-6CAB-441A-870B-397696599418@clickspace.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: count(*) performance  ("Luke Lonergan" <llonergan@greenplum.com>)
Responses Re: count(*) performance  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>)
Re: count(*) performance  (Guido Neitzer <guido.neitzer@pharmaline.de>)
Re: count(*) performance  ("Jim C. Nasby" <jnasby@pervasive.com>)
List pgsql-performance
Does that mean that even though autovacuum is turned on, you still
should do a regular vacuum analyze periodically?

Thanks,

____________________________________________________________________
Brendan Duddridge | CTO | 403-277-5591 x24 |  brendan@clickspace.com

ClickSpace Interactive Inc.
Suite L100, 239 - 10th Ave. SE
Calgary, AB  T2G 0V9

http://www.clickspace.com

On Mar 27, 2006, at 11:14 AM, Luke Lonergan wrote:

> Gabriel,
>
> On 3/27/06 10:05 AM, "Gábriel Ákos" <akos.gabriel@i-logic.hu> wrote:
>
>> That gave me an idea. I thought that autovacuum is doing it right,
>> but I
>> issued a vacuum full analyze verbose , and it worked all the day.
>> After that I've tweaked memory settings a bit too (more fsm_pages)
>
> Oops! I replied to your disk speed before I saw this.
>
> The only thing is - you probably don't want to do a "vacuum full", but
> rather a simple "vacuum" should be enough.
>
> - Luke
>
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of
> broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
>


Attachment

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: george young
Date:
Subject: simple join uses indexes, very slow
Next
From: "Matthew T. O'Connor"
Date:
Subject: Re: count(*) performance