From: | Gábor Farkas <gabor(at)nekomancer(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Alban Hertroys <alban(at)magproductions(dot)nl> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: to drop a 30GB database. is it slow? |
Date: | 2005-09-30 10:33:14 |
Message-ID: | 433D146A.4040900@nekomancer.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Alban Hertroys wrote:
> Gábor Farkas wrote:
>
>> i'm only afraid that maybe if we issue the drop-db command, it will
>> take for example 30minutes...
>
>
> Wouldn't it be more effective to create a new table by selecting your
> session table and switch their names? You can drop the troublesome table
> afterwards, without influencing the availability of your database any
> further.
>
> This should minimize your downtime, I think - unless people have even
> speedier solutions, of course.
>
thanks, but what my fear is:
as i understand, this little db eats up 30GB of space (the real content
should be like 10MB), because it was not vacuumed for a long time.
but a normal vacuum does not recover disk space, it still keeps it.
we need to do a different vacuum that recovers the disk space, but for
that time the db will not respond.
so, what if simply dropping the table does not recover the disk-space?
thanks,
gabo
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2005-09-30 10:58:55 | Re: installing several PostgreSQL instances on Windows |
Previous Message | Zlatko Matić | 2005-09-30 10:22:06 | installing several PostgreSQL instances on Windows |