| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Scott Carey <scott(at)richrelevance(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andy Colson <andy(at)squeakycode(dot)net>, Gnanakumar <gnanam(at)zoniac(dot)com>, "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Database size growing over time and leads to performance impact |
| Date: | 2010-03-31 20:47:31 |
| Message-ID: | t2k603c8f071003311347re104c292v9a052e493c540e14@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin pgsql-performance |
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 4:37 PM, Scott Carey <scott(at)richrelevance(dot)com> wrote:
> On Mar 27, 2010, at 6:35 AM, Andy Colson wrote:
>>
>> Dont "VACUUM FULL", its not helping you, and is being removed in newer versions.
>>
>
> Off topic: How is that going to work? CLUSTER doesn't work on tables without an index. I would love to be able to CLUSTER on some column set that doesn't necessarily have an index.
I believe the new VF implementation just rewrites the data in the same
physical order as it was in previously, but without the dead space.
So it's sort of like cluster-by-no-index-at-all.
...Robert
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2010-03-31 20:47:57 | Re: Database size growing over time and leads to performance impact |
| Previous Message | Scott Carey | 2010-03-31 20:37:15 | Re: Database size growing over time and leads to performance impact |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2010-03-31 20:47:57 | Re: Database size growing over time and leads to performance impact |
| Previous Message | Scott Carey | 2010-03-31 20:37:15 | Re: Database size growing over time and leads to performance impact |