From: | Rakesh Kumar <rakeshkumar464a3(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | |
Cc: | "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: question on error during COPY FROM |
Date: | 2016-08-23 14:06:11 |
Message-ID: | CAJBB=EVQaZQ3vk1MN0ag+hxf9ebh0bH9wW395v8hpfg3z4CONw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Is it true that one datafile in PG can only belong to one object (table/index)
On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 9:55 AM, Francisco Olarte
<folarte(at)peoplecall(dot)com> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 2:32 PM, Ilya Kazakevich
> <Ilya(dot)Kazakevich(at)jetbrains(dot)com> wrote:
>>>does that mean that I should always execute a VACUUM to recover the
>>>wasted space when an error is triggered or will the auto-vacuum mechanism
>>>do the job by itself ?
>> If you have autovacuum enabled it will clean up tablespace. However, space will not be returned to filesystem but will be reused by database.
>> You may run VACUUM FULL manually to return it to filesystem.
>
> A normal vacuum may also return some space, specially after a big bulk
> load, see second paragraph of 23.1.2 the URL you posted:
>> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.1/static/routine-vacuuming.html
>
> Where it says "However, it will not return the space to the operating
> system, except in the special case where one or more pages at the end
> of a table become entirely free and an exclusive table lock can be
> easily obtained.". A big aborted bulk load may just fit the case, as
> it may put a lot of tuples at new pages at the end and be executed in
> a low-load period where the lock is easier to acquire.
>
>
> Francisco Olarte.
>
>
> --
> 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 | Adrian Klaver | 2016-08-23 14:13:48 | Re: question on error during COPY FROM |
Previous Message | Adrian Klaver | 2016-08-23 14:04:50 | Re: Why insertion throughput can be reduced with an increase of batch size? |