| From: | "Mikko Partio" <mpartio(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Scott Marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "ruben(at)rentalia(dot)com" <ruben(at)rentalia(dot)com>, Decibel! <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>, db(at)zigo(dot)dhs(dot)org, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [Again] Postgres performance problem |
| Date: | 2007-09-12 18:56:13 |
| Message-ID: | 2ca799770709121156l7ddbb20agf8086e8bfcbc881a@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On 9/12/07, Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On 9/12/07, ruben(at)rentalia(dot)com <ruben(at)rentalia(dot)com> wrote:
> > Try a REINDEX. VACUUM FULL is especially hard on the indexes, and it's
> > > easy for them to seriously bloat.
> >
> > Reindex is done everyday after VACUUM FULL VERBOSE ANALYZE. I save also
> > the output averyday and save it into a log, and I can check that it is
> > done properly.
>
> Then you're vacuum full is wasted. A reindex accomplishes the same
> thing, plus shrinks indexes (vacuum full can bloat indexes).
Aren't you mixing up REINDEX and CLUSTER?
Regards
MP
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Scott Marlowe | 2007-09-12 19:07:01 | Re: [Again] Postgres performance problem |
| Previous Message | Brian Hurt | 2007-09-12 18:46:01 | Re: [Again] Postgres performance problem |