Re: Alternative for vacuuming queue-like tables

On Apr 28, 2006, at 9:32 AM, Csaba Nagy wrote:

> I'm not sure how this operation can work in the presence of other long
> running transactions which did not touch the queue table yet, but it
> actually does work, I can confirm that. Is it violating MVCC maybe ?

It sounds like it does potentially violate mvcc, but I haven't
thought hard about it. It also has the advantage that it rebuilds
your indexes during the clustering.

And a convenient feature is that you just define those CLUSTER
statements once, then whenever you need it, just run "CLUSTER;" all
by itself and all tables previously defined as clustered will be re-
clustered on the specified index.