Re: 7.4 <-> 8.0

still thinking on this topic, read about the REINDEX command, that will
recreate your indexes, per table or per database.
Regards,
Guido.

On 9/15/05, Guido Barosio <gbarosio(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Hi Warren
> On the space issue, seems at a first sight that the old db needs a vacuum
> full to free some room.
> Try to identify your biggest tables, isolate the vacuum against them, and
> then escalate to the whole db, with a vacuum full.
> Thinking that you should double check the vacuum documentation, to
> understand better which are the effects of the different vacuum modes. This
> will clear out your doubts on why such amount of space is being allocated,
> but not being used.
> My two cents there.
> Best wishes,
> Guido.
> On 9/15/05, Warren Snelling <snelling(at)email(dot)marc(dot)usda(dot)gov> wrote:
> >
> > All,
> >
> > Couple questions from to a recent upgrade from 7.4.8 to 8.0.3. With
> > servers for both versions running on the same machine,
> >
> > pg_dumpall -p 5432 -c | psql -p 5433 template1
> >
> > appears to have migrated the databases smoothly. At least I didn't
> > notice any errors in the process, and all the data appears to be there.
> >
> > The one troubling thing is the new 8.0 databases take about half the
> > disk space as the 7.4 databases. Similar dump | psql to recreate the
> > databases on other machines running 7.4.7 and 7.4.8 show the same thing
> > - the fresh copies take half the space of the old. What might be
> > happening with the old db, so it takes so much more space? Could half
> > the data be missing?
> >
> > What's the best way to move data from 8.0 to 7.4? The 8.0 pg_dump
> > writes a dump that doesn't restore with 7.4 psql, and 7.4 pg_dump
> > doesn't seem to handle an 8.0 database. At least I haven't found the
> > right switches...
> >
> > Thanks,
> > warren
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> > TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
> >
>
>
>
> --
> "Adopting the position that you are smarter than an automatic
> optimization algorithm is generally a good way to achieve less
> performance, not more" - Tom Lane.

--
"Adopting the position that you are smarter than an automatic
optimization algorithm is generally a good way to achieve less
performance, not more" - Tom Lane.