Re: Frequently updated tables

>
> Sigh, because vacuums take away from performance.

This is a known issue that has been pretty much resolved for 7.5. Vacuum
in 7.5 does not take even close to as much IO resources.


Imagine a table that has
> to be updated on the order of a few thousand times a minute. Think about
> the drop in performance during the vacuum.
>
> On a one row table, vacuum is not so bad, but try some benchmarks on a
> table with a goodly number of rows.
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your
>       joining column's datatypes do not match


--
Command Prompt, Inc., home of Mammoth PostgreSQL - S/ODBC and S/JDBC
Postgresql support, programming shared hosting and dedicated hosting.
+1-503-667-4564 - jd@commandprompt.com - http://www.commandprompt.com
Mammoth PostgreSQL Replicator. Integrated Replication for PostgreSQL