Re: [PERFORM] Poor Performance on a table

2004-12-02 Thread Josh Berkus
Pallav, > Yes, you are right this table is heavily updated, the whole database > size is of 1.5 gigs, right now i have default fsm settings how much > should i increase max_fsm_pages and max_fsm_relations to ? 1) fix the table (see below) 2) run the system for another day 3) run VACUUM FULL ANA

Re: [PERFORM] Poor Performance on a table

2004-12-02 Thread Tom Lane
Pallav Kalva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> Another likely problem is that you >> need to increase the FSM settings (how big is your whole database?) >> > Yes, you are right this table is heavily updated, the whole database > size is of 1.5 gigs, right now i have default fsm se

Re: [PERFORM] Poor Performance on a table

2004-12-02 Thread Pallav Kalva
Tom Lane wrote: Pallav Kalva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: I have a table in my production database which has 500k rows and from the pg_class it shows the number of "relpages" of around 750K for this table, the same table copied to a test database shows "relpages" as 35k. I run vacuumdb on th

Re: [PERFORM] Poor Performance on a table

2004-12-02 Thread Pallav Kalva
Hi Frank, Thanks! for the quick reply, here are my current default fsm setting . max_fsm_pages = 2 and max_fsm_relations = 1000 What are the appropriates settings for these parameters ? are there any guidlines ? postgres docs doesnt give much information on setting these values. Th

Re: [PERFORM] Poor Performance on a table

2004-12-02 Thread Frank Wiles
On Thu, 02 Dec 2004 14:32:53 -0500 Pallav Kalva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Frank, > > Thanks! for the quick reply, here are my current default fsm > setting . > max_fsm_pages = 2 and max_fsm_relations = 1000 >What are the appropriates settings for these parameters ? are

Re: [PERFORM] Poor Performance on a table

2004-12-02 Thread Tom Lane
Pallav Kalva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I have a table in my production database which has 500k rows and > from the pg_class it shows the number of "relpages" of > around 750K for this table, the same table copied to a test database > shows "relpages" as 35k. I run vacuumdb on the whole >

Re: [PERFORM] Poor Performance on a table

2004-12-02 Thread Frank Wiles
On Thu, 02 Dec 2004 14:11:46 -0500 Pallav Kalva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi , > > I have a table in my production database which has 500k rows and > from the pg_class it shows the number of "relpages" of > around 750K for this table, the same table copied to a test database > shows "rel

[PERFORM] Poor Performance on a table

2004-12-02 Thread Pallav Kalva
Hi , I have a table in my production database which has 500k rows and from the pg_class it shows the number of "relpages" of around 750K for this table, the same table copied to a test database shows "relpages" as 35k. I run vacuumdb on the whole database (not on the table individually but the