On Mon, 22 Nov 1999, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Mount <peter(at)retep(dot)org(dot)uk> writes:
> > Ah, try running first vacuum; then vacuum analyze. The first one will
> > truncate the table removing the wasted space. The second simply rebuilds
> > some statistics about the table.
> This is not right --- AFAICT, vacuum *always* runs the compaction phase.
> You can allow or skip the stats-gathering phase by specifying "analyze"
> or not, but "vacuum analyze" implies "vacuum".
Thanks for the correction. I've always run both myself, hence the answer.
Peter T Mount peter(at)retep(dot)org(dot)uk
Main Homepage: http://www.retep.org.uk
PostgreSQL JDBC Faq: http://www.retep.org.uk/postgres
Java PDF Generator: http://www.retep.org.uk/pdf
In response to
pgsql-interfaces by date
|Next:||From: Rafal Piotrowski (CSCS)||Date: 1999-11-23 08:47:10|
|Subject: Re: [INTERFACES] problem with getBytes|
|Previous:||From: Byron Nikolaidis||Date: 1999-11-23 00:22:10|
|Subject: Re: [INTERFACES] weird Access problem|