Re: serious problems with vacuuming databases - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Alvaro Herrera
Subject Re: serious problems with vacuuming databases
Date
Msg-id 20060409204555.GB16673@surnet.cl
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: serious problems with vacuuming databases  (Tomas Vondra <tv@fuzzy.cz>)
Responses Re: serious problems with vacuuming databases
List pgsql-performance
Tomas Vondra wrote:
> > Probably the indexes are bloated after the vacuum full.  I think the
> > best way to get rid of the "fat" is to recreate both tables and indexes
> > anew.  For this the best tool would be to CLUSTER the tables on some
> > index, probably the primary key.  This will be much faster than
> > VACUUMing the tables, and the indexes will be much smaller as result.
>
> I guess you're right. I forgot to mention there are 12 composed indexes
> on the largest (and not deleted) table B, having about 14.000.000 rows
> and 1 GB of data. I'll try to dump/reload the database ...

Huh, I didn't suggest to dump/reload.  I suggested CLUSTER.  You need to
apply it only to tables where you have lots of dead tuples, which IIRC
are A, C and D.

--
Alvaro Herrera                                http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Tomas Vondra
Date:
Subject: Re: serious problems with vacuuming databases
Next
From: Tomas Vondra
Date:
Subject: Re: serious problems with vacuuming databases