Re: truncate vs. delete
От | Emi Lu |
---|---|
Тема | Re: truncate vs. delete |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 48889377.7080804@encs.concordia.ca обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: truncate vs. delete ("A. Kretschmer" <andreas.kretschmer@schollglas.com>) |
Список | pgsql-sql |
A. Kretschmer wrote: > am Thu, dem 24.07.2008, um 10:01:46 -0400 mailte Emi Lu folgendes: >> A. Kretschmer wrote: >>> am Thu, dem 24.07.2008, um 9:47:48 -0400 mailte Emi Lu folgendes: >>>> I found a link for SQL Server, it applies to PostgreSQL 8.0.x as well? >>>> http://vadivel.blogspot.com/2004/06/delete-vs-truncate-statement.html >>> Not realy, for instance, pg can rollback a truncate, and a sequence are >>> not reset. >>> >>> >> Thank you. I am quite sure that I will not use "delete" now. >> Now I a question about how efficient between >> >> (1) truncate a big table (with 200, 000) >> vacuum it (optional?) > > not required > > >> drop primary key >> load new data >> load primary ke >> vacuum it > > analyse it, instead vacuum. It gets more and more clear to me know! I guess I need only do analyze(primary key column) after loading data. The new picture will be: . truncate table . drop primary key . load data . set primary key . analyze interesting columns
В списке pgsql-sql по дате отправления: