From: | Wes <wespvp(at)msg(dot)bt(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: REINDEX on large DB vs. DROP INDEX/CREATE INDEX |
Date: | 2008-02-04 15:00:03 |
Message-ID: | C3CC8493.70DD4%wespvp@msg.bt.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
Just a follow-up on this... The REINDEX took about 2 1/2 days. I didn't
gain much disk space back - a full backup takes just as long as before, but
the vacuum time dropped from 30 hours to 3 hours.
Wes
>> 1. Is there any advantage to doing the DROP/CREATE over just doing a REINDEX
>> DATABASE.
>
> No, not if you don't mind exclusive locks. DROP together with CREATE
> INDEX CONCURRENTLY might be nicer if you were trying to do this without
> completely shutting down the DB, but if you aren't running normal
> operations then just use REINDEX.
>
>> 2. I'm assuming REINDEX would avoid the time involved in recreating the
>> foreign key constraints?
>
> Right, that's one reason to do it that way.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Gregory Stark | 2008-02-04 15:07:45 | Re: PostgreSQL Certification |
Previous Message | Selena Deckelmann | 2008-02-04 14:52:42 | Re: PostgreSQL Certification |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Roberts, Jon | 2008-02-04 15:44:17 | Re: Merge condition in postgresql |
Previous Message | Stephen Frost | 2008-02-04 14:27:42 | Re: Merge condition in postgresql |