Re: question about vacuum and index bloat

From: "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
To: "John Lister" <john(dot)lister-ps(at)kickstone(dot)com>, <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: question about vacuum and index bloat
Date: 2009-12-02 17:55:55
Message-ID: 4B1655CB020000250002CF5B@gw.wicourts.gov
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-admin

"John Lister" <john(dot)lister-ps(at)kickstone(dot)com> wrote:

> When you do a vacuum it marks the deleted rows as being usable
> again and I can see that it reports that "xxx index row versions
> were removed", however are these rows marked for reuse in an index
> in the same manner as they are in the table? I note that the docs
> say that vacuum full doesn't shrink indexes and that a reindex is
> recommended periodically, is this still true if the table is
> frequently vacuumed?

VACUUM makes space in indexes available for re-use. I don't think
that reindex is normally needed for recent releases, although I seem
to remember hearing that it was needed in older versions. What
version are you running?

-Kevin

In response to

Browse pgsql-admin by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message John Lister 2009-12-03 11:03:54
Previous Message Ian Lea 2009-12-02 11:47:32 Re: pg_restore does not restore all tables