On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 17:49:41 -0400
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Aug 12, 2005 at 10:49:43AM -0700, Mark Wong wrote:
I thought I'd run a couple of tests to see if it would be helpful
against CVS from Aug 3, 2005.
Here's a run with autovacuum turned off:
On Fri, Aug 12, 2005 at 10:49:43AM -0700, Mark Wong wrote:
I thought I'd run a couple of tests to see if it would be helpful
against CVS from Aug 3, 2005.
Here's a run with autovacuum turned off:
http://www.testing.osdl.org/projects/dbt2dev/results/dev4-015/42/
5186.55 notpm
Autvacuum on
On Fri, Aug 12, 2005 at 03:16:04PM -0700, Mark Wong wrote:
On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 17:49:41 -0400
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Notice how the subindexes are wrong ... I think it should be 1:3 for
i_orders, no? Apparently indexes_scan.data has the same problem.
Whoops! I think I
On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 18:42:09 -0400
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Aug 12, 2005 at 03:16:04PM -0700, Mark Wong wrote:
On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 17:49:41 -0400
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Notice how the subindexes are wrong ... I think it should be 1:3 for
On Fri, Aug 12, 2005 at 03:49:57PM -0700, Mark Wong wrote:
On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 18:42:09 -0400
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Also, it seems the tran_lock.out file captured wrong input -- I think
you mean WHERE transactionid IS NULL in the query instead of WHERE
transaction IS
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Updated this patch again:
- vacuum_cost_delay and vacuum_cost_limit can be set per table, as well
as globally with autovacuum_vacuum_cost_{limit,delay}
- pgstat is reset if recovery is required
- pgstat reset at postmaster start is disabled by
On Thu, Aug 11, 2005 at 05:13:15PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Updated this patch again:
Applied with minor tweaks --- mostly, fixing it so the custom cost
settings are applied for ANALYZE as well as VACUUM.
Ok, cool, thanks. I think this completes the
Updated this patch again:
- vacuum_cost_delay and vacuum_cost_limit can be set per table, as well
as globally with autovacuum_vacuum_cost_{limit,delay}
- pgstat is reset if recovery is required
- pgstat reset at postmaster start is disabled by default
- Xid-wraparound VACUUM is
On Fri, Jul 29, 2005 at 03:33:09PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
It occurs to me that vacuuming to prevent XID wraparound is not the only
reason to do DB-wide vacuums: we also need to keep
pg_database.datvacuumxid from getting too old, else we will have
problems with clog bloat. We may need to
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hmm. I have a patch for this, but now that it's ready, I wonder if it's
really needed. If I understand vacuum_set_xid_limits() correctly, it's
very difficult for the vacuumxid to be far behind the freeze limit.
Umm ... they can be close together, or a
On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 11:24:40PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hmm. I have a patch for this, but now that it's ready, I wonder if it's
really needed. If I understand vacuum_set_xid_limits() correctly, it's
very difficult for the vacuumxid to be far
On Sun, Jul 31, 2005 at 07:36:36PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Updated this patch:
- vacuum_cost_delay and vacuum_cost_limit can be set per table, as well
as globally with autovacuum_vacuum_cost_{limit,delay}
- pgstat is reset if recovery is required
- pgstat reset at postmaster start
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Here is another patch for autovacuum:
...
- Xid-wraparound VACUUM is now FULL without ANALYZE
Am I right in my assumption that this VACUUM FULL can happen for any
database, not just a template database?
I think this is a bad idea. Vacuum full is not an option for
On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 09:55:11AM +0200, Michael Paesold wrote:
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Here is another patch for autovacuum:
...
- Xid-wraparound VACUUM is now FULL without ANALYZE
Am I right in my assumption that this VACUUM FULL can happen for any
database, not just a template
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
- Xid-wraparound VACUUM is now FULL without ANALYZE
Am I right in my assumption that this VACUUM FULL can happen for any
database, not just a template database?
Ah, right. I think it would be OK if we made it FULL only for
datallowcon=false
On Fri, Jul 29, 2005 at 03:33:09PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
It occurs to me that vacuuming to prevent XID wraparound is not the only
reason to do DB-wide vacuums: we also need to keep
pg_database.datvacuumxid from getting too old, else we will have
problems with clog bloat. We may need to
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, Jul 29, 2005 at 03:33:09PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
It occurs to me that vacuuming to prevent XID wraparound is not the only
reason to do DB-wide vacuums: we also need to keep
pg_database.datvacuumxid from getting too old, else we will have
Here is another patch for autovacuum:
- vacuum_cost_delay and vacuum_cost_limit can be set per table, as well
as globally with autovacuum_vacuum_cost_{limit,delay}
- pgstat is reset if recovery is required
- pgstat reset at postmaster start is disabled by default
- Xid-wraparound VACUUM is
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
I still haven't added custom cost-based delays, but I don't see that as
a showstopper for removing it. I just went through the CVS log and I
don't see anything else that applies.
I think you should at least add an autovacuum specific value for
vacuum_cost_delay because
Michael Paesold [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
I still haven't added custom cost-based delays, but I don't see that as
a showstopper for removing it. I just went through the CVS log and I
don't see anything else that applies.
I think you should at least add an autovacuum
Tom Lane wrote:
Michael Paesold [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
I still haven't added custom cost-based delays, but I don't see that as
a showstopper for removing it. I just went through the CVS log and I
don't see anything else that applies.
I think you should at
Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian pgman@candle.pha.pa.us writes:
I think you should at least add an autovacuum specific value for
vacuum_cost_delay because it turns cost-based vacuum delay on or off.
I am thinking we should move ahead with what we have now, suggest the
work-arounds, and
Bruce Momjian pgman@candle.pha.pa.us writes:
I think you should at least add an autovacuum specific value for
vacuum_cost_delay because it turns cost-based vacuum delay on or off.
I am thinking we should move ahead with what we have now, suggest the
work-arounds, and thensee what use-cases
On Sat, Jul 30, 2005 at 10:57:15AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian pgman@candle.pha.pa.us writes:
I think you should at least add an autovacuum specific value for
vacuum_cost_delay because it turns cost-based vacuum delay on or off.
I am thinking we should
BTW, is there still any reason not to remove the contrib/pg_autovacuum
directory from CVS?
regards, tom lane
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
On Fri, Jul 29, 2005 at 11:19:34AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
BTW, is there still any reason not to remove the contrib/pg_autovacuum
directory from CVS?
I still haven't added custom cost-based delays, but I don't see that as
a showstopper for removing it. I just went through the CVS log and I
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Updated this patch:
- The stat collector is modified so as to keep shared relations separate
from regular ones. Autovacuum understands this.
[etc]
Applied with some fixes --- you had broken the reporting of statistics
for shared tables, for one
On Fri, Jul 29, 2005 at 03:33:09PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Updated this patch:
- The stat collector is modified so as to keep shared relations separate
from regular ones. Autovacuum understands this.
[etc]
Applied with some fixes --- you had
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Also the patch seemed to be missing diffs for header files?
Damn, I generated the diff from within src/backend instead of the root
:-( Sorry for the inconvenience.
No problem --- reverse-engineering the changes to function declarations
was simple
On Fri, Jul 29, 2005 at 05:46:11PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Also the patch seemed to be missing diffs for header files?
Damn, I generated the diff from within src/backend instead of the root
:-( Sorry for the inconvenience.
No problem ---
On Mon, Jul 25, 2005 at 09:31:15AM +0800, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
We have to consider what
happens at stat reset -- AFAICS there's no problem, because as soon as
the table sees some activity, it will be picked up by pgstat.
However, it would be bad if stats are reset right after
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ok, so there's a reason for having a manual stat-reset. However what's
the rationale for cleaning stats at postmaster start? In fact I think
it's actively bad because you lose any data you had before postmaster
stop/crash.
We probably *should* drop
Tom Lane wrote:
Matthew T. O'Connor matthew@zeut.net writes:
I don't know either, but this brings up another question. Stats
wraparound.
We'll all be safely dead, for one thing ;-)
At one update per nanosecond, it'd take approximately 300 years to wrap
a 64-bit counter. Somehow I
On Thu, Jul 14, 2005 at 10:52:56AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
I've applied Alvaro's latest integrated-autovacuum patch. There are
still a number of loose ends to be dealt with before beta, though:
Updated this patch:
- The stat collector is modified so as to keep shared relations separate
from
On Thu, Jul 14, 2005 at 10:52:56AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
I've applied Alvaro's latest integrated-autovacuum patch. There are
still a number of loose ends to be dealt with before beta, though:
Ok, here's a patch that deals with some of this:
- The stat collector is modified so as to keep
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
- pg_statistic is completely ignored.
... pg_statistic still needs vacuuming, surely. It's only ANALYZE
that you can/should skip for it.
- The postmaster's main loop sleeps Min(60, autovacuum_naptime), in
order to be able to pick naptimes smaller
On Sun, Jul 24, 2005 at 02:33:38PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
- pg_statistic is completely ignored.
... pg_statistic still needs vacuuming, surely. It's only ANALYZE
that you can/should skip for it.
Sorry, yes, it's ignored only for analyze.
- The
We have to consider what
happens at stat reset -- AFAICS there's no problem, because as soon as
the table sees some activity, it will be picked up by pgstat.
However, it would be bad if stats are reset right after some heavy
activity on a table. Maybe the only thing we need is
Matthew T. O'Connor matthew@zeut.net writes:
I don't know either, but this brings up another question. Stats
wraparound. The n_tup_ins/upd/del columns in the stats system are
defined as bigint, what happens when the total number of upd for example
exceeds the capacity for bigint, or
39 matches
Mail list logo
