| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Martin Marques <martin(at)bugs(dot)unl(dot)edu(dot)ar>, frank church <pgsql(at)adontendev(dot)net>, pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Does VACUUM reorder tables on clustered indices |
| Date: | 2005-12-19 03:08:22 |
| Message-ID: | 13769.1134961702@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-sql |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> Note that while reordering, CLUSTER also gets rid of dead tuples, so if
> you cluster you don't need to vacuum.
Just for the record, that behavior is seriously broken: it violates
MVCC if any of the deleted tuples are still visible to anyone else.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Trent Shipley | 2005-12-19 03:17:35 | Re: Automatic function replanning |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2005-12-19 01:32:39 | Re: [pgadmin-hackers] Client-side password encryption |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2005-12-19 04:29:36 | Re: Does VACUUM reorder tables on clustered indices |
| Previous Message | Michael Fuhr | 2005-12-19 02:19:04 | Re: Need SQL Help Finding Current Status of members |