| From: | "scott(dot)marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Shridhar Daithankar <shridhar_daithankar(at)persistent(dot)co(dot)in> |
| Cc: | <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: index question.. |
| Date: | 2002-11-13 17:20:45 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.33.0211131019420.31179-100000@css120.ihs.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Wed, 13 Nov 2002, Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
> On 13 Nov 2002 at 5:56, Williams, Travis L, NPONS wrote:
>
> > Do indexs need to be dropped/recreated or reindex'd or something to keep them current?
>
> AFAIU, indexes will keep themselves current but dropping and recreating them
> wokrs like vacuum on indexes. IIRC vacuum does not recover deleted index space.
>
> Correct me if I am wring..
Very close. The problem is that deleted index space should be recovered
but sometimes isn't when there are massive amounts of updates at once or
between vacuums.
There is some generally held belief that increasing the FSM settings in
postgresql.conf can help this situation.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | scott.marlowe | 2002-11-13 17:21:41 | Re: index question.. |
| Previous Message | scott.marlowe | 2002-11-13 17:18:19 | Re: Upgrade to dual processor machine? |