From: | Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Shapiro <mshapiro51(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Little, Douglas" <DOUGLAS(dot)LITTLE(at)orbitz(dot)com>, PgAdmin Support <pgadmin-support(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: fsm and vacuum |
Date: | 2010-12-03 15:19:06 |
Message-ID: | 4CF90A6A.5050705@lelarge.info |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgadmin-support |
Le 03/12/2010 15:17, Michael Shapiro a écrit :
> The document http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/VACUUM_FULL says:
>
> VACUUM FULL, unlike VACUUM, tuples data that has not been deleted, moving it
> into spaces earlier in the file that have been freed. Once it's created a
> free space at the end of the file, it truncates the file so that the OS
> knows that space is free and may be reused for other things. Moving in-use
> data around this way has some major downsides and side-effects, especially
> the way VACUUM FULL does it. There are better ways to free space if you need
> to and better ways to optimize tables (see below) so *you should essentially
> never use VACUUM FULL*.
>
>
> PgAdmin does not give the user a comparable warning when it goes to execute
> a VACCUM FULL. Given the potential problems with the FULL option, would it
> make sense for PgAdmin to issue a warning to this effect?
>
I'm not sure this is the role of pgAdmin to warn people they are doing
potentially stupid things.
--
Guillaume
http://www.postgresql.fr
http://dalibo.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Shapiro | 2010-12-03 15:25:59 | Re: fsm and vacuum |
Previous Message | Michael Shapiro | 2010-12-03 14:17:44 | Re: fsm and vacuum |