| From: | Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Anand Kumar, Karthik" <Karthik(dot)AnandKumar(at)classmates(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: vacuum full post 9.0 - reindex needed? |
| Date: | 2015-01-28 20:48:19 |
| Message-ID: | CAECtzeXXryR5PvLeD99pQZotohhSdEhwuM9ztVcY=8VGDBgzhw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Hi,
2015-01-28 21:39 GMT+01:00 Anand Kumar, Karthik <
Karthik(dot)AnandKumar(at)classmates(dot)com>:
> I haven’t been able to find clear information online about what happens
> with existing indexes on a postgres post-9.0 database (we specifically use
> 9.3) after a vacuum full.
>
> There is a lot of information on how a vacuum differs from a vacuum
> full, but my question is – is a re-index needed after a full vacuum?
>
> We’ve seen from practice that indexes do work after vacuum fulls, but –
> will a reindex make them more optimal?
>
>
Starting from 9.0, you don't need to REINDEX after a VACUUM FULL.
--
Guillaume.
http://blog.guillaume.lelarge.info
http://www.dalibo.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Leon Dang | 2015-01-28 22:00:09 | Re: Request for review of new redis-fdw module |
| Previous Message | Anand Kumar, Karthik | 2015-01-28 20:39:47 | vacuum full post 9.0 - reindex needed? |