On Wednesday 14 September 2005 08:23, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> OK. But how many are you updating between regular vacuums? That's the
> real issue. If your regular vacuums aren't often enough, postgresql
> starts lengthening the tables instead of reusing the space in them that
> was freed by the last updates / deletes.
>
> Keep in mind, that in postgresql, all updates are really insert / delete
> pairs, as far as storage is concerned. So, updates create dead tuples
> just like deletes would.
>
> > Is my use of indexes correct?
>
> Seems good to me.
Ok but this does seem to be a not a lot of records. Even if the user updated
500 times a day (500 * 200) will only add 100000 records. I would not expect
that performance would suffer adding 100000 per day for at least a week.
Even if the number was double (in case I mis-read the user prior emails)
200000 or 1000000 at the end of the week would not account for the slow down?
Or am I miss reading?
John