Scott Marlowe wrote:
On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 8:13 AM, Jack Orenstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
My application is running on 7.4. We have one huge table that drives
SNIP
We're in the process of upgrading to 8.3.4, so I'd appreciate any
throughs on whether and how this behavior will change with
Adriana Alfonzo escribió:
> Please, i wan't recive more mails
Por favor visita esta pagina:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
y desuscribete tu misma de la lista.
--
Alvaro Herrerahttp://www.Comman
Please, i wan't recive more mails
Thanks
Scott Marlowe escribió:
On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 8:13 AM, Jack Orenstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
My application is running on 7.4. We have one huge table that drives
SNIP
We're in the process of upgrading to 8.3.4, so I'd appreciate any
throu
On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 8:13 AM, Jack Orenstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My application is running on 7.4. We have one huge table that drives
SNIP
> We're in the process of upgrading to 8.3.4, so I'd appreciate any
> throughs on whether and how this behavior will change with the newer
> release
Jack Orenstein wrote:
> 1) Why does the tiny table bloat during a vacuum? Is it because the
> scan of the huge table is run as a transaction, forcing maintenance of
> dead versions of the tiny table's one row?
Yes.
> 2) Why does the bloat resolve itself? We're not doing any full
> vacuums.
Prob
My application is running on 7.4. We have one huge table that drives
our application, and also a tiny (single-row) table used to maintain
some aggregate information. Each transaction inserts or updates 1-2
rows in the huge table, and updates the tiny table.
We vacuum the entire database once a we
