Re: Vacuum on the database versus individual tables.

From: "Hartman, Matthew" <Matthew(dot)Hartman(at)krcc(dot)on(dot)ca>
To: "Merlin Moncure" <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Vacuum on the database versus individual tables.
Date: 2009-06-25 16:17:54
Message-ID: 366642367C5B354197A1E0D27BC175BD022597A1@KGHMAIL.KGH.ON.CA
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

I do have autovacuum on (as of yesterday). This was discovered when I
ran vacuum on a whim.

Matthew Hartman
Programmer/Analyst
Information Management, ICP
Kingston General Hospital
(613) 549-6666 x4294

-----Original Message-----
From: Merlin Moncure [mailto:mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com]
Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2009 12:10 PM
To: Hartman, Matthew
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Vacuum on the database versus individual tables.

On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 10:40 AM, Hartman,
Matthew<Matthew(dot)Hartman(at)krcc(dot)on(dot)ca> wrote:
> Good morning.
>
>
>
> On occasion I'll perform a full vacuum on a database but will still
receive
> a suggestion to vacuum an individual table immediately after. Does the
full
> database vacuum not handle each individual table?

As of 8.3, for the most part you can trust autovacuum to do its thing
if it's enabled...there are exceptions to this but I'm curious why you
are doing 'vacuum full'.

merlin

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2009-06-25 16:20:40 Re: Vacuum on the database versus individual tables.
Previous Message Alan Hodgson 2009-06-25 16:11:07 Re: planned recovery from a certain transaction