Re: vacuum all but system tables
От | Victor Yegorov |
---|---|
Тема | Re: vacuum all but system tables |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20030319150242.GG14195@pirmabanka.lv обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: vacuum all but system tables (Tomasz Myrta <jasiek@klaster.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: vacuum all but system tables
|
Список | pgsql-sql |
* Tomasz Myrta <jasiek@klaster.net> [19.03.2003 16:57]: > U?ytkownik Victor Yegorov napisa?: > >* Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> [19.03.2003 16:32]: > > > >>"Victor Yegorov" <viy@pirmabanka.lv> writes: > >> > >>>I'd like to make a script to automatically vacuum all my DBs nightly. And > >>>I'd like to skip system tables, starting with pg_*. > >> > >>Um ... what in the world makes you think that's a good idea? System > >>tables need maintenance too. > >> > >> regards, tom lane > > > > > >Yes, of course they need. > > > >May be I'll put my question in a different manner: > > > >System tables are location-wide (I mean one set of tables for PostgreSQL > >location) or each database has it's own set of system tables? > > > >If second, I apologies for noising. If first, I'd like to have a separate > >script for them. > > They are location-wide. What's wrong with default vacuuming all > databases at once nightly? Or maybe you better need to vacuume only > specific tables? Tom Lane pointed, that only 3 tables are location-wide: pg_database, pg_shadow, pg_group. Anyway, I understood, that there is more 'good' than 'bad' in vacuuming system tables ;) Thanks everyone. -- Victor Yegorov
В списке pgsql-sql по дате отправления: