Re: first post, need info on postgres + storing objects
От | Stephan Szabo |
---|---|
Тема | Re: first post, need info on postgres + storing objects |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20020214141237.S24379-100000@megazone23.bigpanda.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | first post, need info on postgres + storing objects (getting rid of them mainly) ("Joris Hilhorst" <joris@dl2.org>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
On Thu, 14 Feb 2002, Joris Hilhorst wrote: > if this is the wrong place to post, please let me know. > > I am trying to fix a mess on a system running a postgresql database (7.1 I > think) > java objects where stored on this server but it seems to me that when the > rows > holding the OID's of these objcets are deleted, or the tables holding the > multiple > rows is dropped, the attached objects aren't removed themselves. > > (I have double checked this assumptionof mine just now) > for each OID with number yyyyyyyyyyy there is a file in the datadir named > xinxyyyyyyyyyyy (header?) and a (value?) file of xinvyyyyyyyyyyy > > both files are not removed after dropping the rows linking to these files. > am I doing something wrong here, or is this a 'feature'? Does anyone have > similar problems? Since AFAIK you can have multiple rows pointing to one object, and I could see cases where someone would want to get the lo oid, delete a row and insert a new one that points to that same lo rather than having to import the lo again, it's hard to say. If you're not in one of those cases a trigger on the table to do the cleanup is probably a good idea. > I tried the vacuum function which only sizes down some system tables but > leaves > the object files untouched. Is there another function I should be looking > into? You might want to look at contrib/vacuumlo which looks for orphaned large objects.
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: