On Jun 23, 2006, at 12:39 PM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote: > > On Jun 23, 2006, at 11:51 AM, sean wrote: >> The only reason I wanted to split the db in the first place is that I >> don't really like the thought of having the application data (like >> auth, flatpages etc.) and the production database (which is also >> accessed by other applications) in one db. I guess a few extra >> columns >> don't do any harm, but as I use postgresql I'm kind of worried that >> the >> autovacuum function bails out and somehow leaves the db in an >> unstable >> state. This has improved a lot in recent versions, but there still >> seem >> to be some problems from time to time. > > Wow, that sounds really awful, and would scare the crap out of me, > too. > > However, just so that nobody gets the wrong idea about Django or > Postgres: my main production database has about 250 tables in it and > I've never had a single problem with autovacuum or anything else. >
Back in Postgres version 7.0 or before, there were some problems with vacuuming, not from corruption, but from table lockouts. Vacuuming could halt transactions for minutes at a time. The latest versions of Postgres can vacuum much more efficiently and you can now vacuum at the table level. That said, we don't auto vacuum and we're still running 7.3.3 on our production databases. I might get around to it once a month or so, but it's not much of a concern. Don --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
