Re: Proposal "VACUUM SCHEMA"
От | Jim Nasby |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Proposal "VACUUM SCHEMA" |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 549B0B92.4@BlueTreble.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Proposal "VACUUM SCHEMA" (Fabrízio de Royes Mello <fabriziomello@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 12/23/14, 8:49 PM, Fabrízio de Royes Mello wrote: > Em terça-feira, 23 de dezembro de 2014, Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@bluetreble.com <mailto:Jim.Nasby@bluetreble.com>> escreveu: > > On 12/23/14, 8:54 AM, Fabrízio de Royes Mello wrote: > > > Right now a lot of people just work around this with things like DO blocks, but as mentioned elsewhere in thethread that fails for commands that can't be in a transaction. > > > > I use "dblink" to solve it. :-) > > > So... how about instead of solving this only for vacuum we create something generic? :) Possibly using Robert's backgroundworker work? > > > Interesting idea. > > But and what about the idea of improve the "--table" option from clients: vaccumdb and clusterdb? Seems reasonable. -- Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: