Re: CLUSTER and indisclustered

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Gavin Sherry <swm(at)linuxworld(dot)com(dot)au>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: CLUSTER and indisclustered
Date: 2002-08-04 03:20:17
Message-ID: 6637.1028431217@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> Tom, should we be updating that flag after we CLUSTER instead of
> requiring an ANALYZE after the CLUSTER?

Could do that I suppose, but I'm not super-excited about it. ANALYZE is
quite cheap these days (especially in comparison to CLUSTER ;-)). I'd
settle for a note in the CLUSTER docs that recommends a subsequent
ANALYZE --- this seems no different from recommending ANALYZE after bulk
data load or other major update of a table.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2002-08-04 03:21:45 Re: CLUSTER and indisclustered
Previous Message Gavin Sherry 2002-08-04 03:05:39 Re: CLUSTER and indisclustered