Re: R: Vacuum full: alternatives?

On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 6:13 AM, Andreas Kretschmer <andreas(at)a-kretschmer(dot)de
> wrote:

>
>
> Am 20.06.2016 um 11:43 schrieb Job:
>
>> Hi Andreas,
>>
>> I would suggest run only autovacuum, and with time you will see a not
>>> more growing table. There is no need for vacuum full.
>>>
>> So new record, when will be pg_bulkloaded, will replace "marked-free"
>> location?
>>
>
>
> exactly, that's the task for vacuum
>
>
>
> Andreas
>
>
> --
> 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
>

>We do not delete everything at one (in this case the truncate woudl
resolve the problem).

Please, it is very important you provide PostgreSQL version & O/S, as
improvements to VACUUM may play a role here.

Is there any reason you cannot partition the table? Moving the data to
separate partitions
(based on a date or key field) will allow you to vacuum full only 1
partition at a time.

--
*Melvin Davidson*
I reserve the right to fantasize. Whether or not you
wish to share my fantasy is entirely up to you.