From: | Anthony Bull <antsbull(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Jens Wilke <jens(at)wilke(dot)org> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL reclaiming table space |
Date: | 2012-05-28 11:28:14 |
Message-ID: | CAGK=A1kpv_qgtKQZuW4ax9HhHA_o2fjdkZEGa0fbmy4+sDVaCg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
About 3 hours after the Vacuum full completed, the disk space got returned
to the OS - now Windows is reporting it has all that disk back. Must have
been waiting for something? Anyway, great news!
On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 11:23 PM, Anthony Bull <antsbull(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> I did not run analyze, only vacuum full - the disk usage reported by the
> OS has stayed the same also - the data folder under postgres is still at
> over 25GB. Postgres itself also still reports db size at 25GB, but when I
> ask postgres for a table breakdown by size, it reports only about 9GB of
> tables in the db.
>
> Will analyze help? I was under the impression that was more for
> statistics gathering and index optimising?
>
> On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 11:16 PM, Jens Wilke <jens(at)wilke(dot)org> wrote:
>
>> On Montag, 28. Mai 2012, Anthony Bull wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> >This did not
>> > work either - postgres still reports 25GB being used by the
>> > database.
>>
>> Did you run analyze?
>> Did the disk usage reported by the OS shrink?
>>
>> Regards, Jens
>>
>> --
>> Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org)
>> To make changes to your subscription:
>> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
>>
>
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Stevo Slavić | 2012-05-28 14:23:39 | Deleting, indexes and transactions |
Previous Message | Jasen Betts | 2012-05-28 11:27:16 | Re: PostgreSQL reclaiming table space |