Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Big index sizes

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info>
Cc: Laszlo Nagy <gandalf(at)shopzeus(dot)com>, "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Big index sizes
Date: 2008-12-30 15:39:21
Message-ID: 15381.1230651561@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info> writes:
> Laszlo Nagy a crit :
>> We have serveral table where the index size is much bigger than the
>> table size.
>> ...
>> Vacuuming a table does not rebuild the indexes, am I right?

> Neither VACUUM nor VACUUM FULL rebuild the indexes. CLUSTER and REINDEX do.

In fact, VACUUM FULL tends to make indexes *more* bloated not less so.
One fairly likely explanation for how you got into this situation is
overeager use of VACUUM FULL.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: bricklenDate: 2008-12-30 18:59:23
Subject: Poor plan choice in prepared statement
Previous:From: Robert HaasDate: 2008-12-30 14:50:55
Subject: Re: perform 1 check vs exception when unique_violation

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group