Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
On 12/5/11 1:36 PM, Kevin Grittner wrote:
I understand the impulse to run autovacuum less frequently or
less aggressively. When we first started running PostgreSQL the
default configuration was very cautious.
The default settings are deliberately
On 12/5/11 1:36 PM, Kevin Grittner wrote:
I understand the impulse to run autovacuum less frequently or less
aggressively. When we first started running PostgreSQL the default
configuration was very cautious.
The default settings are deliberately cautious, as default settings
should be.
But
Hi Kevin, comments after your comments
2011/12/3 Kevin Grittner kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov:
Ernesto Quiñones wrote:
Scott Marlowe wrote:
Ernesto Quiñones wrote:
I want to know if it's possible to predict (calculate), how long
a VACUUM FULL process will consume in a table?
I don't think
On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 10:19 AM, Ernesto Quiñones ernes...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Kevin, comments after your comments
2011/12/3 Kevin Grittner kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov:
Ernesto Quiñones wrote:
Scott Marlowe wrote:
Ernesto Quiñones wrote:
I want to know if it's possible to predict
On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 10:42 AM, Scott Marlowe scott.marl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 10:19 AM, Ernesto Quiñones ernes...@gmail.com wrote:
vacuum_cost_delay 1s
vacuum_cost_limit 200
Those are insane settings for vacuum costing, even on a very slow
machine.
no problem Scott, thanks for your appreciations
2011/12/5 Scott Marlowe scott.marl...@gmail.com:
On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 10:42 AM, Scott Marlowe scott.marl...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 10:19 AM, Ernesto Quiñones ernes...@gmail.com wrote:
vacuum_cost_delay 1s
Ernesto Quiñonesernes...@gmail.com wrote:
I understand the impulse to run autovacuum less frequently or less
aggressively. When we first started running PostgreSQL the default
configuration was very cautious. A lot of bloat would accumulate
before it kicked in, at which point there was a
On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 11:36 AM, Kevin Grittner
kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov wrote:
Ernesto Quiñonesernes...@gmail.com wrote:
vacuum_cost_limit 200
We've boosted this to 600. Once you're in a steady state, this is
the setting you might want to adjust up or down as needed to make
cleanup
Thanks for the answer Scott, actually my autovacuum_naptime is 1h ..
but I don't find naptime parameter for a manual vacuum
thanks again
2011/12/2 Scott Marlowe scott.marl...@gmail.com:
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 8:32 PM, Ernesto Quiñones ernes...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi friends
I want to know if
Ernesto Quiñones wrote:
Scott Marlowe wrote:
Ernesto Quiñones wrote:
I want to know if it's possible to predict (calculate), how long
a VACUUM FULL process will consume in a table?
I don't think you said what version of PostgreSQL you're using.
VACUUM FULL prior to version 9.0 is not
On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 6:11 AM, Ernesto Quiñones ernes...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks for the answer Scott, actually my autovacuum_naptime is 1h ..
but I don't find naptime parameter for a manual vacuum
That's really high, but what I meant to as was what your
vacuum_cost_delay was set to. Also
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 8:32 PM, Ernesto Quiñones ernes...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi friends
I want to know if it's possible to predict (calculate), how long a
VACUUM FULL process will consume in a table?
can I apply some formula to calculate this?
If you look at what iostat is doing while the
12 matches
Mail list logo
