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

Re: Vacuum time degrading

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Wes Palmer <Wesley(dot)R(dot)Palmer(at)syntegra(dot)com>
Cc: Postgresql-General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Vacuum time degrading
Date: 2005-03-03 04:50:04
Message-ID: 17057.1109825404@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-generalpgsql-hackers
Wes Palmer <Wesley(dot)R(dot)Palmer(at)syntegra(dot)com> writes:
> Any chance of change that
> behavior to scan in physical storage order?

It wouldn't be easy --- there are some locking considerations that say
btbulkdelete needs to scan the index in the same order that an ordinary
scan would do.  See the nbtree README for details.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2005-03-03 05:20:35
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] UTF8 or Unicode
Previous:From: Wes PalmerDate: 2005-03-03 04:46:48
Subject: Re: Vacuum time degrading

pgsql-general by date

Next:From: jack alexDate: 2005-03-03 06:44:37
Subject: does postgres supports syslog-ng package for loging rather than using standart syslog package
Previous:From: Wes PalmerDate: 2005-03-03 04:46:48
Subject: Re: Vacuum time degrading

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