Re: vacuum vs vacuum full

From: Thomas Kellerer <shammat(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: vacuum vs vacuum full
Date: 2020-11-18 09:57:15
Message-ID: 1933cd6b-45b0-be1f-3a05-dd02e341ec28@gmx.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Ron schrieb am 18.11.2020 um 10:44:
> No matter how long it takes, this is an excellent argument for
> partitioning Very Large Tables: many maintenance tasks are made
> *much* easier.

The problem is, you can't partition every table as long as Postgres
does not support a primary key that is independent of the partitioning key
(i.e. until it has "global indexes" as they are called in Oracle)

Thomas

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Olivier Gautherot 2020-11-18 10:00:17 Re: vacuum vs vacuum full
Previous Message Hemil Ruparel 2020-11-18 09:57:01 Re: Postgresql13-devel fails to install on centos 7