| From: | Clodoaldo Pinto <clodoaldo(dot)pinto(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "pgsql-general postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: update functions locking tables |
| Date: | 2005-08-30 13:18:20 |
| Message-ID: | a595de7a050830061843e15af9@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
30 Aug 2005 09:10:51 -0400, Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>:
>
> I think truncate takes a table lock.
> Just change it to "delete from times_producao".
Thanks, i will try it.
>
> Also, if consider doing a "vacuum full" or "cluster" after the batch job to
> clear up the free space (not in a large transaction). That will still take a
> table lock but it may be a small enough downtime to be worth the speed
> increase the rest of the day.
>
I'm already doing a vacuum (not full) once a day.
A vacuum full or a cluster is totally out of reach since each take
about one hour. The biggest table is 170 million rows long.
Regards, Clodoaldo Pinto
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Guy Doune | 2005-08-30 13:39:40 | Get postgresql workin in french... |
| Previous Message | Greg Stark | 2005-08-30 13:12:18 | Re: psql from Linux script |