Re: Request for feature: VACUUM FULL updates pg_stat_all_tables.last_vacuum

From: "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Ron Johnson <ronljohnsonjr(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Pgsql-admin <pgsql-admin(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Request for feature: VACUUM FULL updates pg_stat_all_tables.last_vacuum
Date: 2024-05-09 14:06:25
Message-ID: CAKFQuwbzX+KiHgyCS=8DpVgaTu1H9hjOTO7THK=cH=+vxnuzYA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-admin

On Thu, May 9, 2024 at 6:58 AM Ron Johnson <ronljohnsonjr(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

>
> I'm not wedded to the name RECREATE TABLE, but am wedded to the fact that
> VACUUM FULL is a horrible name for what it does.
>
>
I think there is general agreement here but your cure is arguably worse
than the disease.

A more realistic option would be to at least put "VACUUM FULL" into its own
section of the documentation instead of having FULL be an optional modifier
to the normal VACUUM command.

Are there other spots in the documentation that misrepresent the situation
to our readers?

David J.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-admin by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ron Johnson 2024-05-09 14:21:18 Re: Request for feature: VACUUM FULL updates pg_stat_all_tables.last_vacuum
Previous Message Ron Johnson 2024-05-09 13:58:05 Request for feature: VACUUM FULL updates pg_stat_all_tables.last_vacuum