Steve Wampler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thanks, Tom. Are there any reasons why it would not appear?:
Oh, I shoulda read the code more carefully. I was looking at the bottom
of lazy_scan_index, where the printout is done, and failed to notice the
test at the top:
/*
* If the index i
On Sun, 2003-12-07 at 09:52, Tom Lane wrote:
> Steve Wampler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Hmmm, I have a feeling that's not as obvious as I thought... I can't
> > identify the index (named 'id_index') in the output of vacuum verbose.
>
> In 7.2, the index reports look like
> Index %s: Pa
On Fri, 2003-12-05 at 16:38, Neil Conway wrote:
>
> (1) Can you confirm that the VACUUM FULL on site B actually
> removed all the tuples you intended it to remove? Concurrent
> transactions can limit the amount of data that VACUUM FULL is
> able to reclaim. If you run
Steve Wampler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hmmm, I have a feeling that's not as obvious as I thought... I can't
> identify the index (named 'id_index') in the output of vacuum verbose.
In 7.2, the index reports look like
Index %s: Pages %u; Tuples %.0f.
and should appear in the part of t
On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 09:54:52PM -0500, Robert Treat wrote:
>...
> A vacuum verbose could give you a good indication if you need to reindex,
> compare the # of pages in the index with the # in the table.
Hmmm, I have a feeling that's not as obvious as I thought... I can't
identify the index (
On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 09:54:52PM -0500, Robert Treat wrote:
> On Friday 05 December 2003 16:51, Steve Wampler wrote:
> > I need some help tracking down a sudden, massive slowdown
> > in inserts in one of our databases.
> >
> > PG: 7.2.3 (RedHat 8.0)
> >
> > Background. We currently run nearly i
On Friday 05 December 2003 16:51, Steve Wampler wrote:
> I need some help tracking down a sudden, massive slowdown
> in inserts in one of our databases.
>
> PG: 7.2.3 (RedHat 8.0)
>
> Background. We currently run nearly identical systems
> at two sites: Site A is a 'lab' site used for development
Steve Wampler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> PG: 7.2.3 (RedHat 8.0)
You're using PG 7.2.3 with the PG 7.1 JDBC driver; FWIW, upgrading to
newer software is highly recommended.
> The two sites were performing at comparable speeds until a few days
> ago, when we deleted several million records from
