Re: vacuum vs vacuum full

From: Paul Förster <paul(dot)foerster(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Cybertec Schönig & Schönig GmbH <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>
Cc: Thomas Kellerer <shammat(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: vacuum vs vacuum full
Date: 2020-11-18 13:56:30
Message-ID: CB3E8A7A-9481-4D81-9D93-9BA1B9100B05@gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Hi Laurenz,

> On 18. Nov, 2020, at 13:02, Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at> wrote:
>
> I personally hope that we will never have global indexes.
> I am not looking forward to helping customers with the problems that
> they create (long duration of ATTACH/DETACH PARTITION, index fragmentation).

+1.

Experience shows that global index in Oracle lead to problems when dropping a partition. rebuilding an index, or other such nice administrative stuff, often leading to unnecessarily long downtimes.

Cheers,
Paul

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ravi Krishna 2020-11-18 14:30:28 Re: vacuum vs vacuum full
Previous Message Eric Svenson 2020-11-18 13:46:40 Problem with compiling extensions with Postgres Version 13