Re: autovacuum - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Noah Freire
Subject Re: autovacuum
Date
Msg-id d8dd025a0810301659l59832801y10a8eba71d38e36e@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: autovacuum  ("Matthew T. O'Connor" <matthew@zeut.net>)
List pgsql-general


On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 8:53 PM, Matthew T. O'Connor <matthew@zeut.net> wrote:
Noah Freire wrote:
On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 4:46 PM, Matthew T. O'Connor <matthew@zeut.net <mailto:matthew@zeut.net>> wrote:
 
   Is the table being excluded? (see the pg_autovacuum system table
   settings)
 there's an entry for this table on pg_autovacuum, and it's enabled.
 
     Are you sure that it's not getting processed? Perhaps one worker
   is / has been churning on this table for a  *LONG* time (that is a
   fairly big table).
 Right. I was wrong :-) the table is being processed by autovacuum (I checked via pg_stat_activity). However, as you pinpointed, it's already running for hours (the test workload ended hours ago, basically it is just this autovacuum worker running on the system).  Is there a way to make a more aggressive autovacuum setting for this table? it does not matter if it will affect performance, my concern is that it finishes as soon as possible. I wonder if a manual vacuum wouldn't be faster.
Yes, in the pg_autovacuum table, you can set per-relation vacuum cost delay settings etc...
 
Right. cost-delay for this table is already zeroed. Perhaps autovacuum could have an entry for cpu and/or i/o usage threshold, in a way that when one of this resources had an activity below a pre-defined threshold, autovacuum could run more aggressively (using more i/o and/or more cpu).
 

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Devrim GÜNDÜZ
Date:
Subject: Re: perl-DBD-Pg package for CentOS 5?
Next
From: Gregory Stark
Date:
Subject: Re: Are there plans to add data compression feature to postgresql?