From: | "D'Arcy J(dot)M(dot) Cain" <darcy(at)druid(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)PostgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Possible documentation error |
Date: | 2006-12-26 17:49:55 |
Message-ID: | 20061226124955.55cb4190.darcy@druid.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 26 Dec 2006 18:12:45 +0100
Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 26, 2006 at 12:04:40PM -0500, D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote:
> > Now it certainly seems to me that it should behave as described given
> > the definition of VACUUM FULL so I am a little confused by my tests.
> > My test table only has two entries in it. Is that the issue? In fact,
> > I find the same behaviour if I do a simple VACUUM on the table.
>
> On a table with two entries, VACUUM FULL is going to do nothing of
> interest. Moving tuples within a page is useless, generally.
I thought that that might be the issue. The docs should probably say
"can" instead of "will" then.
--
D'Arcy J.M. Cain <darcy(at)druid(dot)net> | Democracy is three wolves
http://www.druid.net/darcy/ | and a sheep voting on
+1 416 425 1212 (DoD#0082) (eNTP) | what's for dinner.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Edwin Ramirez | 2006-12-26 17:50:19 | WITH support |
Previous Message | Michael Fuhr | 2006-12-26 17:23:52 | Re: Possible documentation error |