RE: [HACKERS] Re: vacuum slowness

From: "Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: "Vadim Mikheev" <vadim(at)krs(dot)ru>, "Bruce Momjian" <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: <hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: RE: [HACKERS] Re: vacuum slowness
Date: 1999-03-18 08:19:40
Message-ID: 000201be7118$119fed40$2801007e@cadzone.tpf.co.jp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
> [mailto:owner-pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org]On Behalf Of Vadim Mikheev
> Sent: Thursday, March 18, 1999 2:07 PM
> To: Bruce Momjian
> Cc: hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: vacuum slowness
>
>
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Indices?
> >
> > Yes. That seems to be the problem. 45k lines, COPY is fast, DELETE is
> > fast if there are no indexes. With an index, it takes a long time.
> > Bummer. Ideas?
>
> I hope to implement space re-using and address vacuum slowness
> in 6.6
>

We would be able to vacuum without blocking same-table writers in v6.5 ?
Or would VACUUM block same-table readers as VACUUM does currently ?

Thanks.

Hiroshi Inoue
Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jan Wieck 1999-03-18 12:07:14 Re: [HACKERS] One more globe
Previous Message Clark Evans 1999-03-18 07:32:27 Re: [HACKERS] Re: vacuum slowness