| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl> |
| Cc: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>, Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, Bo Lorentsen <bl(at)netgroup(dot)dk>, "pgsql-general postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: OID Usage |
| Date: | 2005-01-15 22:06:47 |
| Message-ID: | 12295.1105826807@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl> writes:
> Which reminds me that you wanted to make VACUUM FULL do the equivalent
> of a REINDEX instead of retail deletion of index entries ... is that
> still the idea? Would it do that always, or only under certain
> conditions?
It's still on the to-do list. I ws envisioning that it would switch
strategies based on how many tuples it needed to move --- the REINDEX
is only a win if you're moving a large fraction of the table. But the
details are all still TBD.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bo Lorentsen | 2005-01-15 22:20:04 | Re: Index optimization ? |
| Previous Message | Berteun Damman | 2005-01-15 21:56:50 | Re: Pgsql taking a *lot* of CPU time (unkillable). |