Re: Effects of dropping a large table

From: Ron <ronljohnsonjr(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Effects of dropping a large table
Date: 2023-07-23 20:05:30
Message-ID: f1815a29-4ef4-bb25-0c20-d3973bf7bb2b@gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On 7/23/23 05:27, Peter J. Holzer wrote:
> On 2023-07-23 06:09:03 -0400, Gus Spier wrote:
>> Ah! Truncating a table does not entail all of WAL processes. From the
>> documentation, "TRUNCATE quickly removes all rows from a set of tables. It has
>> the same effect as an unqualified DELETE on each table, but since it does not
>> actually scan the tables it is faster. Furthermore, it reclaims disk space
>> immediately, rather than requiring a subsequent VACUUM operation. This is most
>> useful on large tables." https://www.postgresql.org/docs/14/sql-truncate.html
> I assumed that by "deleting the now empty table" you meant DROPing it.
> (Performing a «DELETE FROM t» just after a «TRUNCATE t» would obviously
> be pointless).
>
> So let me rephrase the question:
>
> What's the advantage of
>
> TRUNCATE t
> DROP t
>
> over just
>
> DROP t

Catalog or serialization locking?  (I don't know; just asking.)

--
Born in Arizona, moved to Babylonia.

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message jian he 2023-07-24 00:57:05 pageinspect bt_page_items doc
Previous Message Peter J. Holzer 2023-07-23 10:27:33 Re: Effects of dropping a large table