Re: More Praise for 7.4RC2 - Mailing list pgsql-general

From scott.marlowe
Subject Re: More Praise for 7.4RC2
Date
Msg-id Pine.LNX.4.33.0311131524530.1239-100000@css120.ihs.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: More Praise for 7.4RC2  ("scott.marlowe" <scott.marlowe@ihs.com>)
List pgsql-general
Oh, another good choice for embedding is sleepycat's berkely db database,
or just plain old db style (gdbm lib, or ndbm, or any of a few others)
hash databases.  Simple, non-relational, and fast.

On Thu, 13 Nov 2003, scott.marlowe wrote:

> On Thu, 13 Nov 2003, Reece Hart wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 2003-11-13 at 10:09, scott.marlowe wrote:
> >
> > > Do you vacuum full every so often?  If not, and if you've been overflowing
> > > your fsm, then your tables will just grow without shrinking.
> > > Also, index growth could be a problem.
> >
> >
> > Hmm. I didn't realize that I needed to vacuum full as well -- I thought
> > vacuum was sufficient for performance gains, and that full reclaimed
> > space but didn't result in significant performance gains. I have
> > reindexed infrequently, but since that locks the table I didn't do that
> > (or vacuum full) often. I guess I should try out pg_autovacuum, but I
> > think that full vacuums only to prevent XID wraparound (if age>1.5B
> > transactions), but not for compaction (is this correct?).


pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Bruno Wolff III
Date:
Subject: Re: simple question
Next
From: "Chris Stokes"
Date:
Subject: Database Corruption ?