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

Re: VACUUM ANALYZE is faster than ANALYZE?

From: Nicolas Barbier <nicolas(dot)barbier(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: VACUUM ANALYZE is faster than ANALYZE?
Date: 2012-02-22 13:13:34
Message-ID: CAP-rdTZRDc4P4Zg=+U-Ct68S5V6ri=EeFv3HSVc8TSVgRQMA=g@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
2012/2/22 Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>:

> On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 9:00 AM, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> I had to reply to query about usage VACUUM ANALYZE or ANALYZE. I
>> expected so ANALYZE should be faster then VACUUM ANALYZE.
>>
>> But is not true. Why?
>
> I'm pretty sure that VACUUM ANALYZE *will* be faster than ANALYZE in
> general, because VACUUM has to scan the whole table, and ANALYZE only
> a fixed-size subset of its pages.

It sounds like you just said the opposite of what you wanted to say.

Nicolas

-- 
A. Because it breaks the logical sequence of discussion.
Q. Why is top posting bad?

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Euler Taveira de OliveiraDate: 2012-02-22 13:14:08
Subject: Re: temporal algebra and data type
Previous:From: Robert HaasDate: 2012-02-22 12:59:39
Subject: Re: VACUUM ANALYZE is faster than ANALYZE?

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