| From: | Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Vacuum questions... |
| Date: | 2005-09-27 18:47:46 |
| Message-ID: | 433993D2.2050408@Yahoo.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 9/24/2005 8:17 PM, Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> Would it be difficult to vacuum as part of a dump? The reasoning behind
> this is that you have to read the table to do the dump anyway,
I think aside from what's been said so far, it would be rather difficult
anyway. pg_dump relies on MVCC and requires to run in one transaction to
see a consistent snapshot while vacuum jiggles around with transactions
in some rather non-standard way.
Jan
--
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#================================================== JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com #
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2005-09-27 19:06:58 | Re: Open items list for 8.1 |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-09-27 18:38:12 | Re: effective SELECT from child tables |