| From: | "Peter J(dot) Holzer" <hjp-pgsql(at)hjp(dot)at> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: does refreshing materialized view make the database bloat? |
| Date: | 2023-01-14 08:51:33 |
| Message-ID: | 20230114085133.7yzay2whq566lzds@hjp.at |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 2023-01-14 11:34:13 +0530, jian he wrote:
> Once we have the diff table, we perform set-based DELETE and INSERT
> operations against the materialized view, and discard both temporary
> tables.
>
>
> Here the temporary tables are "discard" meaning the temporary tables are
> deleted and the temporary tables' spaces are reclaimed immediately?
> Or the temporary tables are deleted and the spaces will be reclaimed by another
> mechanism?
Tables are implemented as files by PostgreSQL. When a table is dropped,
the file is deleted[1]. Whether that means that the space is
"immediately" available again is up to the operating system.
hp
[1] Possibly delayed until commit.
--
_ | Peter J. Holzer | Story must make more sense than reality.
|_|_) | |
| | | hjp(at)hjp(dot)at | -- Charles Stross, "Creative writing
__/ | http://www.hjp.at/ | challenge!"
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2023-01-14 16:17:24 | Re: Why is a hash join preferred when it does not fit in work_mem |
| Previous Message | David G. Johnston | 2023-01-14 06:19:04 | Re: does refreshing materialized view make the database bloat? |