Re: partial VACUUM FULL
От | Joseph Shraibman |
---|---|
Тема | Re: partial VACUUM FULL |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4060AA16.9000607@selectacast.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: partial VACUUM FULL (Bill Moran <wmoran@potentialtech.com>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
My specific case: I updated every row in a large table. In the same transaction I tried to run vacuum on this table, which rolled back the transaction. Then I reran my update. So this large table is now 2/3 expired tuples, and the performance hit is noticable. Bill Moran wrote: > Joseph Shraibman wrote: > >> If I cancel a VACUUM FULL, is the work that was done up until that >> point thrown away? I have a table that needs vacuuming but I can't >> accept the downtime involved in vacuuming. > > > Not sure about the "cancel vacuum full" question, but I had some other > thoughts > for you. > > Keep in mind that a plain vacuum can do a lot of good if done regularly, > and > it doesn't lock tables, thus the database can be in regular use while it's > run. As a result, there is no downtime involved with regularly scheduled > vacuums. > > There _can_ be a performance hit while vacuum is running, so you may > need to > take that into account. But I would expect that the performance hit > incurred > during running vacuum will be less than that of not running it for long > periods of time. >
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: