Re: [HACKERS] autovacuum can't keep up, bloat just continues to rise

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Stephen Frost
Тема Re: [HACKERS] autovacuum can't keep up, bloat just continues to rise
Дата
Msg-id 20170720132845.GE1769@tamriel.snowman.net
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] autovacuum can't keep up, bloat just continues to rise  (Sokolov Yura <y.sokolov@postgrespro.ru>)
Ответы Re: [HACKERS] autovacuum can't keep up, bloat just continues to rise  ("Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>)
Re: [HACKERS] autovacuum can't keep up, bloat just continues to rise  (Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Greetings,

* Sokolov Yura (y.sokolov@postgrespro.ru) wrote:
> I wrote two days ago about vacuum ring buffer:
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/8737e9bddb82501da1134f021bf4929a%40postgrespro.ru
>
> Increasing Vacuum's ring buffer to size of Bulk Writer's one reduces
> autovacuum time in 3-10 times.
> (for both patched and unpatched version I used single non-default
> setting
> 'autovacuum_cost_delay=2ms').
>
> This is single line change, and it improves things a lot.

Right- when the database fits in the OS cache but not in shared_buffers.

I do agree that's a useful improvement to make based on your testing.

It's not clear off-hand how much that would improve this case, as
the database size appears to pretty quickly get beyond the OS memory
size (and only in the first test is the DB starting size less than
system memory to begin with).

Thanks!

Stephen

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] huge RAM use in multi-command ALTER of table heirarchy
Следующее
От: Yugo Nagata
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] xlogfilename