| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Feedback on getting rid of VACUUM FULL |
| Date: | 2009-09-17 17:02:35 |
| Message-ID: | 1253206955.9666.205.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 2009-09-17 at 12:30 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > The update utility being discussed is in danger of confusing these two
> > goals
> > * compact the table using minimal workspace
> > * compact the table with minimal interruption to concurrent updaters
>
> Actually, the update utility is explicitly meant to satisfy both of
> those goals (possibly with different usage styles). I don't see any
> particular confusion.
<sigh> It wasn't explicit until now. The confusion was you saying that
"VACUUM FULL CONCURRENTLY" was an impossible dream, that's why I've
restated it the above way so its clear what we want.
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeff Davis | 2009-09-17 17:09:27 | Re: opportunistic tuple freezing |
| Previous Message | Kevin Grittner | 2009-09-17 16:59:06 | Re: Linux LSB init script |