Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: remove flatfiles.c

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>,Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: remove flatfiles.c
Date: 2009-09-01 23:01:34
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Greg Stark wrote:

> The use cases where VACUUM FULL wins currently are where storing two
> copies of the table and its indexes concurrently just isn't practical.

Yeah, but then do you really need to use VACUUM FULL?  If that's really
a problem then there ain't that many dead tuples around.

> Also perhaps tables where there are too many large indexes to make
> rebuilding them all in one maintenance window practical.

If that's the concern maybe we oughta do something about concurrently
re-creating those indexes somehow.  Plain REINDEX doesn't work of
course, but maybe we can do some trick with creating a new index and
dropping the original one afterwards.

Alvaro Herrera                      
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Greg StarkDate: 2009-09-01 23:34:07
Subject: Re: remove flatfiles.c
Previous:From: Greg StarkDate: 2009-09-01 22:53:57
Subject: Re: remove flatfiles.c

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group