| From: | Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)BlueTreble(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | <fabriziomello(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Proposal "VACUUM SCHEMA" |
| Date: | 2014-12-22 22:00:38 |
| Message-ID: | 54989486.2060802@BlueTreble.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 12/22/14, 10:05 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
>> While the feature itself might be fairly innocuous, I'm just wondering
>> >why we need to encourage manual vacuuming. And why that, but not
>> >say schema-wide ANALYZE, CLUSTER, TRUNCATE, ...
> There's one argument for supporting more for VACUUM than the rest - it
> can't be executed directly as the result of a query as the others
> can... I wonder if that'd not better be answered by adding a feature to
> vacuumdb that allows selecting the to-be-vacuumed table by a user
> defined query.
I would MUCH rather that we find a way to special-case executing non-transactional commands dynamically, because VACUUM isn't the only one that suffers from this problem.
--
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jim Nasby | 2014-12-22 22:02:57 | Re: Proposal "VACUUM SCHEMA" |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2014-12-22 21:36:08 | Re: Role Attribute Bitmask Catalog Representation |