| From: | Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone23(dot)bigpanda(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | <frbn(at)efbs-seafrigo(dot)fr> |
| Cc: | <pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: SELECT * FROM t where p or q; |
| Date: | 2001-11-20 17:58:04 |
| Message-ID: | 20011120095544.L57636-100000@megazone23.bigpanda.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-sql |
On Tue, 20 Nov 2001 frbn(at)efbs-seafrigo(dot)fr wrote:
> thanks to you, after a 15mn long "vacuum ANALYZE table" :(
Ugh. 7.2s vacuum will be much happier (since it doesn't lock
the tables from other usual use - yay Tom!) but I think there's
also some things you may be able to do to speed it up. It's
possible dropping indexes and recreating them may be faster.
> I can't figure out how Tera-bytes databases admins can
> deal with such vacuum delays!
> (except if a vacuum is only needed every 10 millions records :] )
It mostly depends on the frequency of deletes and updates to the
database.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Fábio Santana | 2001-11-20 23:56:55 | RULES |
| Previous Message | frbn | 2001-11-20 17:42:05 | Re: SELECT * FROM t where p or q; |