Re: VACUUM FULL versus CLUSTER ON

From: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: Sven Willenberger <sven(at)dmv(dot)com>
Subject: Re: VACUUM FULL versus CLUSTER ON
Date: 2006-07-07 16:55:32
Message-ID: 200607070955.32939.jd@commandprompt.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Friday 07 July 2006 08:19, Sven Willenberger wrote:
> Postgresql 8.0.4 on FreeBSD 5.4
>
> I have a table consisting of some 300million rows that, every couple of
> months, has 100 million rows deleted from it (an immediately vacuumed
> afterward). Even though it gets routinely vacuumed (the only
> deletions/updates are just the quarterly ones), the freespace map was
> not increased in size to keep up with the growing size of the other
> tables in the database which do experience many updates,etc.

Based on the size of the table, you may want to:

Backup the table
Drop the table
Restore the table

Is is possible that this will be faster in this instance.

Secondly this sounds like a perfect time for you to consider upgrading to 8.1
and making use of table partitioning. That way you can just truncate the child
table containing the old data.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Greg Stark 2006-07-07 16:57:51 Re: VACUUM FULL versus CLUSTER ON
Previous Message Parang Saraf 2006-07-07 16:40:41 How to insert .xls files into database