| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org (PostgreSQL-development) |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] vacuum slowness |
| Date: | 1999-03-18 01:52:36 |
| Message-ID: | 19558.921721956@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> I just deleted all 50,000 rows from a table that has one int4 and one text
> field.
> Why does vacuum take so long? If all the rows are superceeded, so no
> rows actually have to be moved, should it take so long for vacuum to
> run?
Do you have any indexes on the table? I've noticed (and complained in
the past ;-)) that vacuuming a table takes unreasonably long if there
are a lot of dead index entries to be cleaned. It seems faster to drop
and recreate the index in a case like that.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Vadim Mikheev | 1999-03-18 01:53:41 | Re: vacuum slowness |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 1999-03-18 01:50:27 | Re: [HACKERS] Sequences.... |