From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Kevin Brown <kevin(at)sysexperts(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: GLOBAL vs LOCAL temp tables |
Date: | 2003-04-17 14:14:46 |
Message-ID: | 10349.1050588886@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Kevin Brown <kevin(at)sysexperts(dot)com> writes:
> But as Tom pointed out, if you delete a bunch of data from a table
> then insert a fresh set of data, but don't end up inserting much data
> with roughly the same keys that were in the original batch of data,
> you'll get a lot of empty areas in your index that are unused. VACUUM
> marks them as being available for reuse, of course, but that doesn't
> help you unless you insert data containing values that are appropriate
> to the unused areas.
No, you misunderstood. That is the problem in existing releases --- but
in CVS tip, VACUUM can actually remove unused sections from the b-tree
and make that space available for re-use in other key ranges.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2003-04-17 14:35:31 | Re: For the ametures. (related to "Are we losing momentum?") |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-04-17 14:05:20 | Re: [HACKERS] Are we losing momentum? |