| From: | Tino Wildenhain <tino(at)wildenhain(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Kevin Hunter <hunteke(at)earlham(dot)edu>, Joao Ferreira <joao(dot)miguel(dot)c(dot)ferreira(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Postgres General List <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: automatic REINDEX-ing |
| Date: | 2008-08-13 20:24:55 |
| Message-ID: | 48A34317.7070905@wildenhain.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
...
> AIUI, people know VACUUM FULL sucks and that in the cases where it
> really helps CLUSTER is faster anyway and doesn't have the index
> problems. The TODO list reference several discussions on the topic.
>
>> Or, failing that, what's the reason to not issue a REINDEX CONCURRENTLY
>> automatically after a VACUUM FULL (or something to that effect)?
>
> Or how about not doing VACUUM FULL at all. It's not a command that
> should be run regularly in most situations.
Which makes me think if the solution would be to just run CLUSTER under
the hood when VACUUM FULL is requested. Would that introduce any
other problems?
Cheers
Tino
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Rodrigo Faccioli | 2008-08-13 20:30:38 | PostgreSQL and SVN - help me... |
| Previous Message | Dmitry Koterov | 2008-08-13 19:26:28 | Re: How to modify ENUM datatypes? (The solution) |