Re: auto-vacuum vs. full table update

From: Steve Crawford <scrawford(at)pinpointresearch(dot)com>
To: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: auto-vacuum vs. full table update
Date: 2012-04-26 20:00:19
Message-ID: 4F99A953.1060501@pinpointresearch.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On 04/26/2012 12:49 PM, Craig James wrote:
> An update to our system means I'm going to be rewriting every row of
> some large tables (20 million rows by 15 columns). In a situation
> like this, can auto-vacuum take care of it, or should I plan on
> vacuum-full/reindex to clean up?
>
If you want to reclaim the space, a vacuum-full/reindex will do it. But
you are probably better off using cluster. Way faster and you get new
indexes as a by-product. Both methods require an exclusive lock on the
table. If you can't afford the downtime, check out pg_reorg
(http://pgfoundry.org/projects/reorg/)

Cheers,
Steve

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2012-04-26 20:08:55 Re: query optimization
Previous Message Joshua D. Drake 2012-04-26 19:53:32 Re: auto-vacuum vs. full table update