Re: Thoughts on maintaining 7.3

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Thoughts on maintaining 7.3
Date: 2003-10-05 06:11:11
Message-ID: 28339.1065334271@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> By doing REINDEX always, we eliminate some folks are are happy
> doing VACUUM FULL at night, because very few tuples are expired.

But if they have very few tuples expired, why do they need VACUUM FULL?
Seems to me that VACUUM FULL should be designed to cater to the case
of significant updates.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruno Wolff III 2003-10-05 08:17:37 Re: pg_dump bug in 7.4
Previous Message Tom Lane 2003-10-05 06:08:31 Re: COUNT(*) again (was Re: [HACKERS] Index/Function organized table layout)