Re: Is vacuum full lock like old's vacuum's lock?
От | Andrew Sullivan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Is vacuum full lock like old's vacuum's lock? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20020302132032.A28043@mail.libertyrms.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Is vacuum full lock like old's vacuum's lock? (Francisco Reyes <lists@natserv.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Is vacuum full lock like old's vacuum's lock?
|
Список | pgsql-general |
On Sat, Mar 02, 2002 at 01:23:59AM -0500, Francisco Reyes wrote: > On 1 Mar 2002, Neil Conway wrote: > > > Why do you need 'vacuum full' rather than just 'vacuum'? Read the docs, > > it's usually not necessary. > > Because every night I delete/reload a big chunk of my data and then once a > week I delete/reload the entire dataset... about 7 million records. This is one thing that is slightly confusing (to me) about the new vacuum -- perhaps someone more familiar with the internals can clarify? I thought that, in the case Mr Reyes is talking about, Postgres would again use the freed disk space. It's just that the space would not be available to other applications. I thought what VACUUM FULL did was just free the disk space _absolutely_. If I'm right, does that also mean that performance is actually (marginally) _better_ in these types of cases, because the system doesn't need to request new disk blocks from the OS? A -- ---- Andrew Sullivan 87 Mowat Avenue Liberty RMS Toronto, Ontario Canada <andrew@libertyrms.info> M6K 3E3 +1 416 646 3304 x110
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: