On 15.01.2013, at 05:45, Jeff Janes <jeff.ja...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Which makes me think that, as we grew the database more than 250 times in
>> size over a 2-3 months period, relying on autovacuum (some tables grew from
>> 200k to 50m records, other from 1m to 500m records), the autovacuum has
>> either let us down or something has happen to the ANALYZE.
>
> What do pg_stat_user_tables tell you about last_vacuum, last_autovacuum,
> last_analyze, last_autoanalyze?
relname | last_vacuum |
last_autovacuum | last_analyze | last_autoanalyze
------------------------------------+-------------------------------+-------------------------------+-------------------------------+-------------------------------
elements | 2013-01-14 16:14:48.963573+00 |
| 2013-01-14 16:19:48.651155+00 | 2012-12-12
12:23:31.308877+00
This is the problematic table. I think it is clear. Last autovacuum has been
never and last autoanalyze has been mid-December.
Thank you!
>> Is the autovacuum 100% reliable in relation to VACUUM ANALYZE?
>
> No. For example, if you constantly do things that need an access exclusive
> lock, then autovac will keep getting interrupted and never finish.
I see.
So, apparently, we need to interrupt the heavy imports on some reasonable
intervals and do manual VACUUM ANALYZE?
> Cheers,
>
> Jeff
Thank you very much,
T.
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
