Re: clustering without locking

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Scott Ribe <scott_ribe(at)killerbytes(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: clustering without locking
Date: 2008-05-02 14:51:07
Message-ID: 6029.1209739867@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Scott Ribe <scott_ribe(at)killerbytes(dot)com> writes:
>> Huh? If I'm understanding you correctly you'll end up with rows in
>> order, but with a really big hole in the middle of the table. I'm not
>> sure if that qualifies as "clusters".

> That's why he said vacuum when done.

Huh? A plain vacuum wouldn't fix that; a vacuum full would close up the
hole, but (a) it'd not preserve the row ordering, and (b) it'd take an
exclusive lock.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Sullivan 2008-05-02 14:55:41 Re: Swap Space and vm.oom_kill_allocating_task
Previous Message Guillaume Lelarge 2008-05-02 14:49:03 Re: Autovacuum