Horton

Re: Thoughts on maintaining 7.3

Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@dcc.uchile.cl>, "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2003-10-05T14:28:31Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > By doing REINDEX always, we eliminate some folks are are happy
> > doing VACUUM FULL at night, because very few tuples are expired.
> 
> But if they have very few tuples expired, why do they need VACUUM FULL?
> Seems to me that VACUUM FULL should be designed to cater to the case
> of significant updates.

Right, they could just run vacuum, and my 10% idea was bad because the
vacuum full would take an unpredictable amount of time to run depending
on whether it does a reindex.

One idea would be to allow VACUUM, VACUUM DATA (no reindex), and VACUUM
FULL (reindex).  However, as you said, we might not need VACUUM DATA ---
I am just not sure.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073