Re: VACUUM FULL name is very confusing to some people (or to most non expert people)

2018-02-25 18:51 GMT+01:00 Lætitia Avrot <laetitia(dot)avrot(at)gmail(dot)com>:

> Hi all,
>
> For most beginners (and even a lot of advanced users) there is a strong
> confusion between simple VACUUM and VACUUM FULL. They think "full" is
> simply an option to the maintenance operation vacuum while it's not. It's a
> complete different operation.
>
> I have a hard time explaining it when I teach PostgreSQL Administration
> (even if I stress the matter) and I constantly meet customer that are wrong
> about it.
>
> I think that the way we name this two operations is not helping them. I
> had to work with SQL Server some years ago and they use the word "SHRINK"
> to do something similar to "VACUUM FULL". I don't know if it's the best
> option, I think others can be found (COMPACT, DEFRAGMENT...)
>
> Of course, for compatibility reasons, VACUUM FULL should always be
> available, but I think an alias that is less confusing for people could be
> a good thing.
>
> What do you think ?
>

Although VACUUM and VACUUM FULL is different, then result is same (depends
on detail level) - the data files are optimized for other processing. You
should to see a VACUUM like family of commands that does some data files
optimizations. VACUUM, VACUUM FULL, VACUUM FREEZE, VACUUM ANALYZE, ...
Personally I don't think so we need to implement new synonym command for
this case. Why you you cannot to say your students - "VACUUM FULL is like
SHRINK in SQL Server"?

Regards

Pavel

>
> Cheers,
>
> Lætitia
>