| From: | The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | herouth(at)oumail(dot)openu(dot)ac(dot)il, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Re: [QUESTIONS] MySQL benchmark page |
| Date: | 1998-02-03 19:30:57 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.NEB.3.95.980203143032.14960l-100000@hub.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 3 Feb 1998, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > This is correct. Vacuum is fast, vacuum analyze is pretty slow. We
> > > could separate them, I guess, and that would eliminate the write-lock
> > > and be only a readlock.
> >
> > Possible to slip it in for v6.3? Would make it so that an analyze
> > could be done nightly, to keep statistics up, and then a vacuum once a
> > week or so just for garbage collection...?
>
> When I added analyze, I did not understand the issues, so I was able to
> work from Vadim's code in vacuum. I put it on the TODO list. Don't
> know if it can make 6.3. I am working on cleaning up the cacheoffset
> code right now.
Okay...personally, I'm finding 'vacuum <table>' an acceptable work
around, so it isn't too big of a priority :)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 1998-02-03 19:40:03 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: [QUESTIONS] MySQL benchmark page |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 1998-02-03 19:30:09 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: [QUESTIONS] MySQL benchmark page |