| From: | The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Snow <als(at)fl(dot)net(dot)au> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | RE: Postgresqlism & Vacuum? |
| Date: | 2000-04-15 00:33:12 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.BSF.4.21.0004142132080.2807-100000@thelab.hub.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Sat, 15 Apr 2000, Andrew Snow wrote:
> > v7.0beta5, with a table that has *over* 5miillion tuples:
> > pgsql% time psql -c "vacuum" postgresql
> > VACUUM
> > 0.000u 0.022s 2:46.67 0.0% 0+0k 0+0io 0pf+0w
>
> That certainly is good. I look forward to installing a non-beta version 7
> in place of the current latest 6 and testing! Don't forget it depends not
> only how big the table is in tuples, but how many bytes, how many index,
> etc.. Also the "analyze" option takes a while longer as you know
That is true ... that is why I generally do a vacuum first then analyze
second ... it at least *feels* faster :)
Marc G. Fournier ICQ#7615664 IRC Nick: Scrappy
Systems Administrator @ hub.org
primary: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org secondary: scrappy(at){freebsd|postgresql}.org
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Haroldo Stenger | 2000-04-15 00:47:35 | Re: Postgresqlism & Vacuum? |
| Previous Message | Andrew Snow | 2000-04-14 23:45:36 | RE: Postgresqlism & Vacuum? |