Re: Vacuuming
От | Paul Lambert |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Vacuuming |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 463FE76B.6030009@autoledgers.com.au обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Vacuuming (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Vacuuming
|
Список | pgsql-general |
Tom Lane wrote: > > The only thing a vacuum would do for you there is set the commit hint > bits on the newly-inserted rows. Which might be worth doing if you want > to get the table into a totally "clean" state, but it's probably a bit > excessive. SELECTs on the table will set the hint bits anyway as > they visit not-yet-hinted rows, so it's really a matter of do you want > to pay that overhead all at once or spread-out. > > What you *do* want to do in this situation is an ANALYZE. > > regards, tom lane > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? > > http://archives.postgresql.org/ > > Thanks Tom. Should the ANALYZE be done before or after indexes are built? Or is that irrelevant? Should I not even bother rebuilding indexes when I do these loads? Currently I: 1) Drop Indexes 2) Truncate and copy in new data 3) Vacuum - now changed to analyze. 4) Create indexes I add steps one and four on the assumption that adding 40 million records in one hit might get the indexes confused - but if they are pretty stable I can remove these steps. P. -- Paul Lambert Database Administrator AutoLedgers
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: