Re: partial VACUUM FULL
От
Joseph Shraibman
Тема
Re: partial VACUUM FULL
Дата
Msg-id
406112FA.3090603@selectacast.net
Ответ на
Re: partial VACUUM FULL (Joe Conway)
Список
Дерево обсуждения
partial VACUUM FULL Joseph Shraibman <jks@selectacast.net>
Re: partial VACUUM FULL Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: partial VACUUM FULL Bill Moran <wmoran@potentialtech.com>
Re: partial VACUUM FULL Joseph Shraibman <jks@selectacast.net>
Re: partial VACUUM FULL Christopher Petrilli <petrilli@amber.org>
Re: partial VACUUM FULL Frank Finner <postgresql@finner.de>
Re: partial VACUUM FULL Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: partial VACUUM FULL Bill Moran <wmoran@potentialtech.com>
Re: partial VACUUM FULL Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: partial VACUUM FULL Bill Moran <wmoran@potentialtech.com>
Re: partial VACUUM FULL Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: partial VACUUM FULL "scott.marlowe" <scott.marlowe@ihs.com>
Re: partial VACUUM FULL Bill Moran <wmoran@potentialtech.com>
Re: partial VACUUM FULL Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>
Re: partial VACUUM FULL Joseph Shraibman <jks@selectacast.net>
Joe Conway wrote: > Tom Lane wrote: > >> This is completely untrue. Increasing vacuum_mem will likely make >> things faster on large tables (by avoiding the need for multiple passes >> over the indexes). It will not change the end result though. > > > I can attest to that, based on very recent empirical evidence. On a 28 > million row table, I saw something like 33% speed-up in going from 256MB > to 320MB for vacuum_mem. > > Joe When I finally ran the vacuum full I set vacuum_mem to 1 gig, but it never used more than 20 meg. Took 40 minutes btw
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления
