| From: | Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl> |
| Cc: | PFC <lists(at)boutiquenumerique(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: What needs to be done for real Partitioning? |
| Date: | 2005-03-22 15:59:16 |
| Message-ID: | 1111507156.5724.1.camel@fuji.krosing.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On T, 2005-03-22 at 09:10 -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 08:26:24PM +0200, Hannu Krosing wrote:
> > On P, 2005-03-20 at 00:52 +0100, PFC wrote:
>
> > > Also note the possibility to mark a partition READ ONLY. Or even a table.
>
> > Would we still need regular VACUUMing of read-only table to avoid
> > OID-wraparound ?
>
> You could VACUUM FREEZE the table or partition, so you wouldn't need to
> vacuum it again.
But when I do just VACUUM; will this know to avoid vacuuming VACUUM
FREEZE'd partitions ?
Or could this be somehow liked to READ ONLY + VACUUM FREEZE state ?
--
Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Rick Jansen | 2005-03-22 16:05:55 | Re: Tsearch2 performance on big database |
| Previous Message | Oleg Bartunov | 2005-03-22 15:45:17 | Re: Tsearch2 performance on big database |