Re: "Healing" a table after massive updates

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Bill Moran <wmoran(at)collaborativefusion(dot)com>
Cc: "Gauthier, Dave" <dave(dot)gauthier(at)intel(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: "Healing" a table after massive updates
Date: 2008-09-11 14:41:00
Message-ID: 20080911144100.GC9492@alvh.no-ip.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Bill Moran wrote:
> In response to "Gauthier, Dave" <dave(dot)gauthier(at)intel(dot)com>:
>
> > I might be able to answer my own question...
> >
> > vacuum FULL (analyze is optional)
>
> CLUSTER _may_ be a better choice, but carefully read the docs regarding
> it's drawbacks first. You may want to do some benchmarks to see if it's
> really needed before you commit to it as a scheduled operation.

What drawbacks?

--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message alefajnie 2008-09-11 14:42:04 HOWTO: select * from array_type
Previous Message Bill Moran 2008-09-11 14:37:21 Re: "Healing" a table after massive updates