Re: Is there a reason _not_ to vacuum continuously? - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From scott.marlowe
Subject Re: Is there a reason _not_ to vacuum continuously?
Date
Msg-id Pine.LNX.4.33.0309171353490.8026-100000@css120.ihs.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Is there a reason _not_ to vacuum continuously?  ("Matt Clark" <matt@ymogen.net>)
Responses Re: Is there a reason _not_ to vacuum continuously?
List pgsql-performance
On Wed, 17 Sep 2003, Matt Clark wrote:

> *** THE QUESTION(S) ***
> Is there any reason for me not to run continuous sequential vacuum analyzes?
> At least for the 6 tables that see a lot of updates?
> I hear 10% of tuples updated as a good time to vac-an, but does my typical
> count of 3 indexes per table affect that?

Generally, the only time continuous vacuuming is a bad thing is when you
are I/O bound.  If you are CPU bound, then continuous vacuuming is usually
acceptable.


pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: "Matt Clark"
Date:
Subject: Is there a reason _not_ to vacuum continuously?
Next
From: Josh Berkus
Date:
Subject: Re: Is there a reason _not_ to vacuum continuously?