From: | "Gauri Kanekar" <meetgaurikanekar(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Greg Smith" <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Replication Syatem |
Date: | 2008-04-29 05:11:33 |
Message-ID: | 7e4ba9550804282211s5568dc75l557e057fd1c33c2@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
But unless we do full vacuum the space is not recovered. Thats y we prefer
full vacuum.
~ Gauri
On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 10:38 AM, Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com> wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Apr 2008, Gauri Kanekar wrote:
>
> Basically we have some background process which updates "table1" and we
> > don't want the application to make any changes to "table1" while vacuum.
> > Vacuum requires exclusive lock on "table1" and if any of the background
> > or
> > application is ON vacuum don't kick off.
> >
>
> VACUUM FULL needs an exclusive lock, the regular one does not in 8.1. It's
> one of the reasons FULL should be avoided. If you do regular VACUUM
> frequently enough, you shouldn't ever need to do a FULL one anyway.
>
>
> --
> * Greg Smith gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com http://www.gregsmith.com Baltimore, MD
>
--
Regards
Gauri
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2008-04-29 05:20:04 | Re: Replication Syatem |
Previous Message | Greg Smith | 2008-04-29 05:08:09 | Re: Replication Syatem |