| From: | Sam Barnett-Cormack <s(dot)barnett-cormack(at)lancaster(dot)ac(dot)uk> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stefan Sturm <mailling(at)anrath(dot)info> |
| Cc: | pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: VACUUM Quesition |
| Date: | 2004-02-05 17:22:32 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.50.0402051721300.12789-100000@short.lancs.ac.uk |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin |
On Thu, 5 Feb 2004, Stefan Sturm wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have a question about vaccum. There are thre Version of vaccums:
> 1.) plain vacuum
> 2.) vacuum analyze
> 3.) full vacuum
>
> Is it right that a vacuum analyze includes the plain vacuum and the full
> vacuum includes the vacuum analyze? And which vacuum locks the tables?
'full' is an option to vacuum, essentially, as is 'analyze', so there
are four variants (ignoring the freeze option):
vacuum
vacuum analyze
vacuum full
vacuum full analyze
It's all pretty obvious from there.
--
Sam Barnett-Cormack
Software Developer | Student of Physics & Maths
UK Mirror Service (http://www.mirror.ac.uk) | Lancaster University
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Adham Helal | 2004-02-05 17:42:03 | Running postmaster with TCP/IP (ipv4) |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-02-05 17:09:49 | Re: R: R: slow seqscan after vacuum analize |