Re: Replication Syatem

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

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  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