Re: Does VACUUM FULL need ANALYZE ?

From: Eoin O'Hehir <eoin(dot)ohehir(at)clavistechnology(dot)com>
To: 76082180(dot)506975(dot)1435347618922(dot)JavaMail(dot)yahoo(at)mail(dot)yahoo(dot)com, "pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Does VACUUM FULL need ANALYZE ?
Date: 2015-06-29 07:43:08
Message-ID: 5590F70C.3040004@clavistechnology.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-admin

Thanks Kevin. That provides a lot of clarity. Cheers.

On 26/06/15 20:40, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> Eoin O'Hehir <eoin(dot)ohehir(at)clavisinsight(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> I'm setting up a weekly DB maintenance job for a 9.3 server.
>>
>> Part of this will be a VACUUM FULL.
> That's something to seriously reconsider.
>
>> Is there any point in adding the ANALYZE option to the command ?
> That and a non-FULL VACUUM command after VACUUM FULL. Unlike what
> you might expect based on the FULL option, a VACUUM FULL does not
> do everything that a non-FULL VACUUM does, and actually drops any
> existing visibility map and free space map -- potentially making
> subsequent queries against the table slower until a normal VACUUM
> (or autovacuum occurs). I strongly recommend that if you really do
> need to use VACUUM FULL, you immediately follow it with VACUUM
> ANALYZE.
>
> You might also want to read this:
>
> http://rhaas.blogspot.com/2014/03/vacuum-full-doesnt-mean-vacuum-but.html
>
> --
> Kevin Grittner
> EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Browse pgsql-admin by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Eoin O'Hehir 2015-06-29 07:46:36 Re: Does VACUUM FULL need ANALYZE ?
Previous Message Dave Johansen 2015-06-29 04:45:01 Re: database must be vacuumed with <N> transactions