| From: | Marcos Pegoraro <marcos(at)f10(dot)com(dot)br> |
|---|---|
| To: | Antonin Houska <ah(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
| Cc: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Junwang Zhao <zhjwpku(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kirill Reshke <reshkekirill(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: why there is not VACUUM FULL CONCURRENTLY? |
| Date: | 2025-01-10 11:10:57 |
| Message-ID: | CAB-JLwZn7Qai1KZks9cuBNoJa9iZjKgG_xjvFyO-VQMFdH=7xg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Em sex., 10 de jan. de 2025 às 06:31, Antonin Houska <ah(at)cybertec(dot)at>
escreveu:
> Thus I understand Alvaro's objections against VACUUM (FULL, CONCURRENTLY).
>
> Therefore I can imagine adding a new command that acts like VACUUM (FULL,
> CONCURRENTLY), but does not try to be CLUSTER (CONCURRENTL).
>
If VACUUM FULL and CLUSTER do the same, why not have a single command ?
--VACUUM FULL would be
RECREATE TABLE [ CONCURRENTLY ] table_name
--CLUSTER would be
RECREATE TABLE [ CONCURRENTLY ] table_name CLUSTERED [ON index_name]
--Maybe someday reordering fields would be
RECREATE TABLE [ CONCURRENTLY ] table_name CLUSTERED [ON index_name] [USING
FIELDS (FLD4,FLD5,FLD3,FLD1,FLD2)]
regards
Marcos
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Chiranmoy.Bhattacharya@fujitsu.com | 2025-01-10 11:19:42 | Re: [PATCH] SVE popcount support |
| Previous Message | Chiranmoy.Bhattacharya@fujitsu.com | 2025-01-10 11:10:03 | Re: [PATCH] Hex-coding optimizations using SVE on ARM. |