| From: | Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Vacuum ignores large objects |
| Date: | 1999-06-04 02:01:19 |
| Message-ID: | 199906040201.WAA01701@candle.pha.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> Is there a reason why vacuum won't vacuum large objects? AFAIK they
> are not really different from ordinary relations, and could be vacuumed
> the same way. If you do a lot of lo_writes to a large object, its file
> size grows without bound because of invalidated tuples, so it'd sure
> be nice for LOs to be vacuumable...
>
> Trying to force the issue doesn't work either:
>
> lotest=> vacuum xinv150337;
> NOTICE: Vacuum: can not process index and certain system tables
> VACUUM
Really. I thought they were just bit buckets. I didn't realize they
actually contain transaction id's and versions.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Lockhart | 1999-06-04 02:08:36 | Re: [HACKERS] Freezing docs for v6.5 |
| Previous Message | Thomas Lockhart | 1999-06-04 02:01:03 | Re: [HACKERS] Open 6.5 items |