Re: Why vacuum?

From: Alfred Perlstein <bright(at)wintelcom(dot)net>
To: mlw <markw(at)mohawksoft(dot)com>
Cc: "Martin A(dot) Marques" <martin(at)math(dot)unl(dot)edu(dot)ar>, bpalmer <bpalmer(at)crimelabs(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Why vacuum?
Date: 2000-12-14 17:38:55
Message-ID: 20001214093855.B4589@fw.wintelcom.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

* mlw <markw(at)mohawksoft(dot)com> [001214 09:30] wrote:
> "Martin A. Marques" wrote:
> >
> > El Mié 13 Dic 2000 16:41, bpalmer escribió:
> > > I noticed the other day that one of my pg databases was slow, so I ran
> > > vacuum on it, which brought a question to mind: why the need? I looked
> > > at my oracle server and we aren't doing anything of the sort (that I can
> > > find), so why does pg need it? Any info?
> >
> > I know nothing about Oracle, but I can tell you that Informix has an update
> > statistics, which I don't know if it's similar to vacuum, but....
> > What vacuum does is clean the database from rows that were left during
> > updates and deletes, non the less, the tables get shrincked, so searches get
> > faster.
> >
>
> While I would like Postgres to perform statistics, one and a while, on
> it own. I like vacuum in general.
>
> I would rather trade unused disk space for performace. The last thing
> you need during high loads is the database thinking that it is time to
> clean up.

Even worse is having to scan a file that has grown 20x the size
because you havne't vacuum'd in a while.

--
-Alfred Perlstein - [bright(at)wintelcom(dot)net|alfred(at)freebsd(dot)org]
"I have the heart of a child; I keep it in a jar on my desk."

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Daniele Orlandi 2000-12-14 18:04:59 Re: AW: Why vacuum?
Previous Message Daniele Orlandi 2000-12-14 17:24:26 Re: Why vacuum?