From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Greg Sabino Mullane <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Index bloat and the need to REINDEX |
Date: | 2006-08-15 23:20:42 |
Message-ID: | 20060815232042.GC22322@alvh.no-ip.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
> Is there a better solution to the "index bloat" problem with regards
> to minimizing locking while reducing an ever-growing use of disk
> space? In particular, it would be nice if there was a way to force
> VACUUM [FULL] to do some of the compression that REINDEX now does.
>
> Right now, we have tables that are updated very frequently, and a
> vacuum full just doesn't do much to reduce the disk space, as
> the indexes keep growing until a REINDEX is done. Tried on HEAD
> as well.
Vacuum full doesn't do anything to shrink the indexes -- rather, it's
the other way around, they become more bloated. Your best bet is to
vacuum (not full) very frequently.
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jonah H. Harris | 2006-08-15 23:32:17 | Re: insert/update/delete returning and rules |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2006-08-15 23:15:26 | Re: BugTracker (Was: Re: 8.2 features status) |