Re: Performance query about large tables, lots of concurrent access

Karl Wright wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> >Karl Wright wrote:

> >>I am afraid that I did answer this.  My largest tables are the ones
> >>continually being updated.  The smaller ones are updated only
> >>infrequently.
> >
> >Can you afford to vacuum them in parallel?
>
> Hmm, interesting question.  If VACUUM is disk limited then it wouldn't
> help, probably, unless I moved various tables to different disks
> somehow.  Let me think about whether that might be possible.

Well, is it disk limited?  Do you have the vacuum_delay stuff enabled?

--
Alvaro Herrera                         http://www.flickr.com/photos/alvherre/
"I would rather have GNU than GNOT."  (ccchips, lwn.net/Articles/37595/)