Re: Vacuum looping?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Decibel!
Тема Re: Vacuum looping?
Дата
Msg-id D494F6AB-F9C7-4A61-B050-181BEE320312@decibel.org
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Vacuum looping?  ("Steven Flatt" <steven.flatt@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-performance
On Jul 30, 2007, at 9:04 AM, Steven Flatt wrote:
> On 7/28/07, Jim C. Nasby <decibel@decibel.org> wrote: What are your
> vacuum_cost_* settings? If you set those too aggressively
> you'll be in big trouble.
>
> autovacuum_vacuum_cost_delay = 100

Wow, that's *really* high. I don't think I've ever set it higher than
25. I'd cut it way back.

> autovacuum_vacuum_cost_limit = 200
>
> These are generally fine, autovacuum keeps up, and there is minimal
> impact on the system.
>
> vacuum_cost_delay = 100
> vacuum_cost_limit = 1000
>
> We set this cost_limit a little higher so that, in the few cases
> where we have to intervene manually, vacuum runs faster.

IIRC, when the cost delay was initially introduced (8.0), someone did
testing and decided that the cost limit of 200 was optimal, so I
wouldn't go changing it like that without good reason.

Normally, I'll use a delay of 10ms on good disk hardware, and 20ms on
slower hardware.
--
Decibel!, aka Jim Nasby                        decibel@decibel.org
EnterpriseDB      http://enterprisedb.com      512.569.9461 (cell)



В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: disk filling up
Следующее
От: Henrik Zagerholm
Дата:
Сообщение: Seq scan on join table despite index and high statistics