Re: [PERFORM] How to avoid database bloat

2005-06-06 Thread Mindaugas Riauba

 Looked like pg_autovacuum is operating as expected.  One of the annoying
 limitations of pg_autovacuum in current releases is that you can't set
 thresholds on a per table basis.  It looks like this table might require
 an even more aggressive vacuum threshold.  Couple of thoughts, are you
 sure it's the table that is growing and not the indexes? (assuming this
 table has indexes on it).

  Yes I am sure (oid2name :) ).

   And one more question - anyway why table keeps growing? It is shown
that
 it occupies
 1 pages and max_fsm_pages = 20 so vacuum should keep up with the
 changes?
 Or is it too low according to pg_class system table? What should be the
 reasonable value?
 
 

 Does the table keep growing?  Or does it grow to a point an then stop
 growing?  It's normal for a table to operate at a steady state size that
 is bigger that it's fresly vacuum full'd size.  And with -V set at 0.5
 it should be at a minimum 50% larger than it's minimum size.  Your email
 before said that this table went from 20M to 70M but does it keep
 going?  Perhaps it would start leveling off at this point, or some point
 shortly there-after.

  Yes it keeps growing. And the main problem is that performance starts to
suffer from that. Do not forget that we are talking about 100+ insert/
update/select/delete cycles per second.

 Anyway, I'm not sure if there is something else going on here, but from
 the log it looks as though pg_autovacuum is working as advertised.

  Something is out there :). But how to fix that bloat? More aggressive
autovacuum settings? Even larger FSM?
  Do not know if that matters but database has very many connections to
it (400-600) and clients are doing mostly asynchronous operations.

  How to find out where this extra space gone?

  Thanks,

  Mindaugas


---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster


Re: [PERFORM] How to avoid database bloat

2005-06-05 Thread matthew
 Mindaugas Riauba [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
   And what in vacuum verbose output suggests that vacuum is not done
 often enough? Current output (table is 100MB already) is below.

 The output shows vacuum cleaning up about a third of the table.  Usually
 people like to keep the overhead down to 10% or so ...


He was running with -V 0.5 which should transalate to roughly 50% of the
table being touched before a vacuum is issued.j

Matt

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster


Re: [PERFORM] How to avoid database bloat

2005-06-05 Thread stig erikson

Mindaugas Riauba wrote:

  Hello,

  Our database increases in size 2.5 times during the day.
What to do to avoid this? Autovacuum running with quite
aggressive settings, FSM settings are high enough.

  Database size should be more or less constant but it
has high turnover rate (100+ insert/update/delete per second).

  Below is du -sk of database dir during the day. On 4:05
full vacuum+reindex runs and database size is once again
reduced.

  Thanks,

  Mindaugas

Tue May 31 11:00:01 EEST 2005
533808  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 11:30:01 EEST 2005
567344  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 12:00:01 EEST 2005
578632  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 12:30:01 EEST 2005
586336  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 13:00:01 EEST 2005
594716  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 13:30:01 EEST 2005
604932  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 14:00:01 EEST 2005
613668  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 14:30:01 EEST 2005
625752  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 15:00:01 EEST 2005
637704  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 15:30:01 EEST 2005
649700  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 16:00:01 EEST 2005
657392  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 16:30:02 EEST 2005
668228  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 17:00:01 EEST 2005
676332  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 17:30:01 EEST 2005
686376  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 18:00:01 EEST 2005
694080  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 18:30:02 EEST 2005
705876  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 19:00:01 EEST 2005
713916  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 19:30:01 EEST 2005
725460  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 20:00:01 EEST 2005
733892  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 20:30:01 EEST 2005
745344  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 21:00:01 EEST 2005
753048  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 21:30:02 EEST 2005
768228  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 22:00:01 EEST 2005
804796  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 22:30:01 EEST 2005
858840  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 23:00:02 EEST 2005
902684  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 23:30:01 EEST 2005
939796  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Wed Jun  1 00:00:02 EEST 2005
990840  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Wed Jun  1 00:30:11 EEST 2005
1005316 /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Wed Jun  1 01:00:02 EEST 2005
1011408 /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Wed Jun  1 01:30:01 EEST 2005
1010888 /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Wed Jun  1 02:00:01 EEST 2005
1010872 /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Wed Jun  1 02:30:01 EEST 2005
1010784 /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Wed Jun  1 03:00:02 EEST 2005
1003260 /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Wed Jun  1 03:30:02 EEST 2005
1003372 /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Wed Jun  1 04:00:01 EEST 2005
1003380 /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Wed Jun  1 04:30:01 EEST 2005
426508  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Wed Jun  1 05:00:01 EEST 2005
429036  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Wed Jun  1 05:30:01 EEST 2005
432156  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Wed Jun  1 06:00:01 EEST 2005
42  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Wed Jun  1 06:30:01 EEST 2005
435052  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Wed Jun  1 07:00:02 EEST 2005
439908  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Wed Jun  1 07:30:01 EEST 2005
450144  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Wed Jun  1 08:00:01 EEST 2005
471120  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Wed Jun  1 08:30:02 EEST 2005
490712  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Wed Jun  1 09:00:01 EEST 2005
501652  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Wed Jun  1 09:30:01 EEST 2005
530128  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Wed Jun  1 10:00:01 EEST 2005
541580  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Wed Jun  1 10:30:01 EEST 2005
571204  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/


---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
  subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
  message can get through to the mailing list cleanly




run autovacuum more often.

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
 subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
 message can get through to the mailing list cleanly


Re: [PERFORM] How to avoid database bloat

2005-06-03 Thread Mindaugas Riauba
 AFAICT the vacuum is doing what it is supposed to, and the problem has
 to be just that it's not being done often enough.  Which suggests either
 an autovacuum bug or your autovacuum settings aren't aggressive enough.
 
   -D -d 1 -v 1000 -V 0.5 -a 1000 -A 0.1 -s 10
 
   That is autovacuum settings. Should be aggressive enough I think?

 Might e aggressive enough, but might not.  I have seen some people run
 -V 0.1.  Also you probably don't need -A that low.  This could an issue
 where analyze results in an inaccurate reltuples value which is
 preventing autovacuum from doing it's job.  Could you please run it with
 -d 2 and show us the relevant log output.

  Relevant parts are below. And we had to set so aggressive analyze because
otherwise planer statistics were getting old too fast. As I said table has
very
high turnover most of the records live here only for a few seconds.

  And one more question - anyway why table keeps growing? It is shown that
it occupies
1 pages and max_fsm_pages = 20 so vacuum should keep up with the
changes?
Or is it too low according to pg_class system table? What should be the
reasonable value?

select sum(relpages) from pg_class;
  sum
---
 77994
(1 row)

  Thanks,

  Mindaugas

[2005-06-03 09:30:31 EEST] DEBUG:   Performing: ANALYZE queue
[2005-06-03 09:30:31 EEST] INFO:  table name: database.queue
[2005-06-03 09:30:31 EEST] INFO: relid: 465440;   relisshared: 0
[2005-06-03 09:30:31 EEST] INFO: reltuples: 98615.00;  relpages:
6447
[2005-06-03 09:30:31 EEST] INFO: curr_analyze_count: 39475111;
curr_vacuum_count: 30
953987
[2005-06-03 09:30:31 EEST] INFO: last_analyze_count: 39475111;
last_vacuum_count: 30
913733
[2005-06-03 09:30:31 EEST] INFO: analyze_threshold: 10861;
vacuum_threshold: 43700

[2005-06-03 09:31:11 EEST] DEBUG:   Performing: VACUUM ANALYZE queue
[2005-06-03 09:31:12 EEST] INFO:  table name: database.queue
[2005-06-03 09:31:12 EEST] INFO: relid: 465440;   relisshared: 0
[2005-06-03 09:31:12 EEST] INFO: reltuples: 99355.00;  relpages:
6447
[2005-06-03 09:31:12 EEST] INFO: curr_analyze_count: 39480332;
curr_vacuum_count: 30
957872
[2005-06-03 09:31:12 EEST] INFO: last_analyze_count: 39480332;
last_vacuum_count: 30
957872
[2005-06-03 09:31:12 EEST] INFO: analyze_threshold: 10935;
vacuum_threshold: 50677



---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend


Re: [PERFORM] How to avoid database bloat

2005-06-03 Thread Matthew T. O'Connor

Mindaugas Riauba wrote:


Might e aggressive enough, but might not.  I have seen some people run
-V 0.1.  Also you probably don't need -A that low.  This could an issue
where analyze results in an inaccurate reltuples value which is
preventing autovacuum from doing it's job.  Could you please run it with
-d 2 and show us the relevant log output.
   



 Relevant parts are below. And we had to set so aggressive analyze because
otherwise planer statistics were getting old too fast. As I said table has
very
high turnover most of the records live here only for a few seconds.
 



Looked like pg_autovacuum is operating as expected.  One of the annoying 
limitations of pg_autovacuum in current releases is that you can't set 
thresholds on a per table basis.  It looks like this table might require 
an even more aggressive vacuum threshold.  Couple of thoughts, are you 
sure it's the table that is growing and not the indexes? (assuming this 
table has indexes on it). 


 And one more question - anyway why table keeps growing? It is shown that
it occupies
1 pages and max_fsm_pages = 20 so vacuum should keep up with the
changes?
Or is it too low according to pg_class system table? What should be the
reasonable value?
 



Does the table keep growing?  Or does it grow to a point an then stop 
growing?  It's normal for a table to operate at a steady state size that 
is bigger that it's fresly vacuum full'd size.  And with -V set at 0.5 
it should be at a minimum 50% larger than it's minimum size.  Your email 
before said that this table went from 20M to 70M but does it keep 
going?  Perhaps it would start leveling off at this point, or some point 
shortly there-after.


Anyway, I'm not sure if there is something else going on here, but from 
the log it looks as though pg_autovacuum is working as advertised. 



---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster


Re: [PERFORM] How to avoid database bloat

2005-06-02 Thread Mindaugas Riauba

Our database increases in size 2.5 times during the day.
  What to do to avoid this? Autovacuum running with quite
  aggressive settings, FSM settings are high enough.

 First thing I'd suggest is to get a more detailed idea of exactly
 what is bloating --- which tables/indexes are the problem?

  I think the most problematic table is this one. After vacuum full/reindex
it was 20MB in size now (after 6 hours) it is already 70MB and counting.

  vacuum verbose output below. msg_id is integer, next_retry - timestamp,
recipient - varchar(20). max_fsm_pages = 20. Another table has foregn
key which referenced msg_id in this one.

  Thanks,

  Mindaugas

$ vacuumdb -v -z -U postgres -t queue database
INFO:  vacuuming queue
INFO:  index queue_msg_id_pk now contains 110531 row versions in 5304
pages
DETAIL:  31454 index row versions were removed.
95 index pages have been deleted, 63 are currently reusable.
CPU 0.03s/0.07u sec elapsed 2.50 sec.
INFO:  index queue_next_retry now contains 110743 row versions in 3551
pages
DETAIL:  31454 index row versions were removed.
1163 index pages have been deleted, 560 are currently reusable.
CPU 0.04s/0.06u sec elapsed 4.93 sec.
INFO:  index queue_recipient_idx now contains 111596 row versions in 1802
pages
DETAIL:  31454 index row versions were removed.
0 index pages have been deleted, 0 are currently reusable.
CPU 0.00s/0.05u sec elapsed 0.16 sec.
INFO:  queue: removed 31454 row versions in 1832 pages
DETAIL:  CPU 0.00s/0.01u sec elapsed 0.27 sec.
INFO:  queue: found 31454 removable, 110096 nonremovable row versions in
9133 pages
DETAIL:  119 dead row versions cannot be removed yet.
There were 258407 unused item pointers.
0 pages are entirely empty.
CPU 0.12s/0.25u sec elapsed 8.20 sec.
INFO:  analyzing queue
INFO:  queue: scanned 3000 of 9133 pages, containing 34585 live rows and
1808 dead rows; 3000 rows in sample, 105288 estimated total rows
VACUUM


---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend


Re: [PERFORM] How to avoid database bloat

2005-06-02 Thread Tom Lane
Mindaugas Riauba [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 First thing I'd suggest is to get a more detailed idea of exactly
 what is bloating --- which tables/indexes are the problem?

   I think the most problematic table is this one. After vacuum full/reindex
 it was 20MB in size now (after 6 hours) it is already 70MB and counting.

AFAICT the vacuum is doing what it is supposed to, and the problem has
to be just that it's not being done often enough.  Which suggests either
an autovacuum bug or your autovacuum settings aren't aggressive enough.

Which PG version is this exactly?  Some of the earlier autovacuum
releases do have known bugs, so it'd be worth your while to update
if you're not on the latest point release of your series.

I don't know much about autovacuum settings, but if you'll show what
you're using someone can probably comment on them.

regards, tom lane

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster


Re: [PERFORM] How to avoid database bloat

2005-06-02 Thread Mindaugas Riauba

  First thing I'd suggest is to get a more detailed idea of exactly
  what is bloating --- which tables/indexes are the problem?

I think the most problematic table is this one. After vacuum
full/reindex
  it was 20MB in size now (after 6 hours) it is already 70MB and counting.

 AFAICT the vacuum is doing what it is supposed to, and the problem has
 to be just that it's not being done often enough.  Which suggests either
 an autovacuum bug or your autovacuum settings aren't aggressive enough.

  -D -d 1 -v 1000 -V 0.5 -a 1000 -A 0.1 -s 10

  That is autovacuum settings. Should be aggressive enough I think?

 Which PG version is this exactly?  Some of the earlier autovacuum
 releases do have known bugs, so it'd be worth your while to update
 if you're not on the latest point release of your series.

  8.0.3

 I don't know much about autovacuum settings, but if you'll show what
 you're using someone can probably comment on them.

  And what in vacuum verbose output suggests that vacuum is not done
often enough? Current output (table is 100MB already) is below.

  Thanks,

  Mindaugas

$ vacuumdb -v -z -U postgres -t queue database
INFO:  vacuuming queue
INFO:  index queue_msg_id_pk now contains 302993 row versions in 18129
pages
DETAIL:  102763 index row versions were removed.
1 index pages have been deleted, 1 are currently reusable.
CPU 0.87s/0.46u sec elapsed 76.40 sec.
INFO:  index queue_next_retry now contains 310080 row versions in 9092
pages
DETAIL:  102763 index row versions were removed.
675 index pages have been deleted, 658 are currently reusable.
CPU 0.38s/0.31u sec elapsed 79.47 sec.
INFO:  index queue_recipient_idx now contains 323740 row versions in 2900
pages
DETAIL:  102763 index row versions were removed.
0 index pages have been deleted, 0 are currently reusable.
CPU 0.07s/0.27u sec elapsed 9.06 sec.
INFO:  queue: removed 102763 row versions in 9623 pages
DETAIL:  CPU 0.16s/0.39u sec elapsed 29.26 sec.
INFO:  queue: found 102763 removable, 292342 nonremovable row versions in
12452 pages
DETAIL:  14 dead row versions cannot be removed yet.
There were 183945 unused item pointers.
0 pages are entirely empty.
CPU 1.56s/1.51u sec elapsed 194.39 sec.
INFO:  analyzing queue
INFO:  queue: scanned 3000 of 12452 pages, containing 72850 live rows and
7537 dead rows; 3000 rows in sample, 302376 estimated total rows
VACUUM


---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings


Re: [PERFORM] How to avoid database bloat

2005-06-02 Thread Matthew T. O'Connor

Mindaugas Riauba wrote:


AFAICT the vacuum is doing what it is supposed to, and the problem has
to be just that it's not being done often enough.  Which suggests either
an autovacuum bug or your autovacuum settings aren't aggressive enough.
   



 -D -d 1 -v 1000 -V 0.5 -a 1000 -A 0.1 -s 10

 That is autovacuum settings. Should be aggressive enough I think?
 



Might e aggressive enough, but might not.  I have seen some people run 
-V 0.1.  Also you probably don't need -A that low.  This could an issue 
where analyze results in an inaccurate reltuples value which is 
preventing autovacuum from doing it's job.  Could you please run it with 
-d 2 and show us the relevant log output.



Which PG version is this exactly?  Some of the earlier autovacuum
releases do have known bugs, so it'd be worth your while to update
if you're not on the latest point release of your series.
   



 8.0.3
 



That should be fine.

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: [PERFORM] How to avoid database bloat

2005-06-02 Thread Tom Lane
Mindaugas Riauba [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
   And what in vacuum verbose output suggests that vacuum is not done
 often enough? Current output (table is 100MB already) is below.

The output shows vacuum cleaning up about a third of the table.  Usually
people like to keep the overhead down to 10% or so ...

regards, tom lane

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
  subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
  message can get through to the mailing list cleanly


[PERFORM] How to avoid database bloat

2005-06-01 Thread Mindaugas Riauba

  Hello,

  Our database increases in size 2.5 times during the day.
What to do to avoid this? Autovacuum running with quite
aggressive settings, FSM settings are high enough.

  Database size should be more or less constant but it
has high turnover rate (100+ insert/update/delete per second).

  Below is du -sk of database dir during the day. On 4:05
full vacuum+reindex runs and database size is once again
reduced.

  Thanks,

  Mindaugas

Tue May 31 11:00:01 EEST 2005
533808  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 11:30:01 EEST 2005
567344  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 12:00:01 EEST 2005
578632  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 12:30:01 EEST 2005
586336  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 13:00:01 EEST 2005
594716  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 13:30:01 EEST 2005
604932  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 14:00:01 EEST 2005
613668  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 14:30:01 EEST 2005
625752  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 15:00:01 EEST 2005
637704  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 15:30:01 EEST 2005
649700  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 16:00:01 EEST 2005
657392  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 16:30:02 EEST 2005
668228  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 17:00:01 EEST 2005
676332  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 17:30:01 EEST 2005
686376  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 18:00:01 EEST 2005
694080  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 18:30:02 EEST 2005
705876  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 19:00:01 EEST 2005
713916  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 19:30:01 EEST 2005
725460  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 20:00:01 EEST 2005
733892  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 20:30:01 EEST 2005
745344  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 21:00:01 EEST 2005
753048  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 21:30:02 EEST 2005
768228  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 22:00:01 EEST 2005
804796  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 22:30:01 EEST 2005
858840  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 23:00:02 EEST 2005
902684  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Tue May 31 23:30:01 EEST 2005
939796  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Wed Jun  1 00:00:02 EEST 2005
990840  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Wed Jun  1 00:30:11 EEST 2005
1005316 /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Wed Jun  1 01:00:02 EEST 2005
1011408 /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Wed Jun  1 01:30:01 EEST 2005
1010888 /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Wed Jun  1 02:00:01 EEST 2005
1010872 /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Wed Jun  1 02:30:01 EEST 2005
1010784 /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Wed Jun  1 03:00:02 EEST 2005
1003260 /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Wed Jun  1 03:30:02 EEST 2005
1003372 /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Wed Jun  1 04:00:01 EEST 2005
1003380 /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Wed Jun  1 04:30:01 EEST 2005
426508  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Wed Jun  1 05:00:01 EEST 2005
429036  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Wed Jun  1 05:30:01 EEST 2005
432156  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Wed Jun  1 06:00:01 EEST 2005
42  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Wed Jun  1 06:30:01 EEST 2005
435052  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Wed Jun  1 07:00:02 EEST 2005
439908  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Wed Jun  1 07:30:01 EEST 2005
450144  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Wed Jun  1 08:00:01 EEST 2005
471120  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Wed Jun  1 08:30:02 EEST 2005
490712  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Wed Jun  1 09:00:01 EEST 2005
501652  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Wed Jun  1 09:30:01 EEST 2005
530128  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Wed Jun  1 10:00:01 EEST 2005
541580  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/
Wed Jun  1 10:30:01 EEST 2005
571204  /ora/pgsql/base/465436/


---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
  subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
  message can get through to the mailing list cleanly


Re: [PERFORM] How to avoid database bloat

2005-06-01 Thread Tom Lane
Mindaugas Riauba [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
   Our database increases in size 2.5 times during the day.
 What to do to avoid this? Autovacuum running with quite
 aggressive settings, FSM settings are high enough.

First thing I'd suggest is to get a more detailed idea of exactly
what is bloating --- which tables/indexes are the problem?

regards, tom lane

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?

   http://archives.postgresql.org