On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 11:10 AM, Scott Whitneyswhit...@journyx.com wrote:
I'd like to phone in with a slightly different opinion on VACUUM FULL. Yeah,
it should be avoided when possible, but it's not always possible. In our
case, I've got 300ish databases backing to a single database server.
...@postgresql.org
[mailto:pgsql-admin-ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Jennifer Spencer
Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 12:02 PM
To: kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov; scott.li...@enterprisedb.com
Cc: scott.marl...@gmail.com; pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] Catching up Production from Warm Standby
Scott Whitney escribió:
I'd like to phone in with a slightly different opinion on VACUUM FULL. Yeah,
it should be avoided when possible, but it's not always possible. In our
case, I've got 300ish databases backing to a single database server. Each of
those dbs has a couple of hundred tables
I'd like to phone in with a slightly different opinion on VACUUM FULL.
Yeah,
it should be avoided when possible, but it's not always possible. In our
case, I've got 300ish databases backing to a single database server. Each
of
those dbs has a couple of hundred tables and a hundred or more
You are sure that the XID wraparound is gone? That's good news. No other
reasons for vacuum full on the entire database.
We could do it a table at a time if we absolutely have to do it, and that would
minimize down time on the rest of the system.
-Jennifer
I _think_ autovacuum,
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 1:40 PM, Jennifer Spencer
jenniferm...@hotmail.comwrote:
You are sure that the XID wraparound is gone? That's good news. No other
reasons for vacuum full on the entire database.
I think we're talking apples and gorillas on the use of the word 'full'.
There is
Jennifer Spencer jenniferm...@hotmail.com wrote:
We do mostly inserts, no updates and very few deletes. We drop
entire tables but don't delete often. We have very long rows,
though. Do you think the above is a situation likely to create
extreme bloat?
No. Only deletes and updates can
