From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | a(dot)schmitz(at)cityweb(dot)de |
Cc: | Oleg Bartunov <oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su>, Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)stack(dot)net>, pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Still a bug in the VACUUM ??? !!! |
Date: | 2003-02-28 20:40:54 |
Message-ID: | 6523.1046464854@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin pgsql-hackers |
Andreas Schmitz <a(dot)schmitz(at)cityweb(dot)de> writes:
> the vacuum seems to be ok. I discovered that the "cluster" kills the
> data for some reason.
Hmm. I'm not sure whether clustering on a GIST index is really useful
(seeing that there's no linear ordering associated with GIST). But it
shouldn't lose data.
I was able to reproduce a problem as follows: run the tsearch regression
test, then do "cluster wowidx on test_txtidx". This appears to lose
one row:
regression=# select count(*) from test_txtidx;
count
-------
502
(1 row)
regression=# cluster wowidx on test_txtidx;
CLUSTER
regression=# select count(*) from test_txtidx;
count
-------
501
(1 row)
Oleg, Teodor, can you investigate this?
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ian Barwick | 2003-02-28 20:47:56 | Re: Cross-database references |
Previous Message | Ed L. | 2003-02-28 20:16:46 | Re: pg_hba.conf |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Stephan Szabo | 2003-02-28 21:58:49 | Foreign key quandries |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-02-28 20:17:19 | Re: result relation used anymore? |