VACUUM FULL name is very confusing to some people (or to most nonexpert people)
От | Lætitia Avrot |
---|---|
Тема | VACUUM FULL name is very confusing to some people (or to most nonexpert people) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAB_COdh-AFiwXcEXdCFJ6cZ8UJ-O7nPORtvV1=m1=X0o9M_KBA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответы |
Re: VACUUM FULL name is very confusing to some people (or to most nonexpert people)
Re: VACUUM FULL name is very confusing to some people (or to most nonexpert people) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi all,
For most beginners (and even a lot of advanced users) there is a strong confusion between simple VACUUM and VACUUM FULL. They think "full" is simply an option to the maintenance operation vacuum while it's not. It's a complete different operation.I have a hard time explaining it when I teach PostgreSQL Administration (even if I stress the matter) and I constantly meet customer that are wrong about it.
I think that the way we name this two operations is not helping them. I had to work with SQL Server some years ago and they use the word "SHRINK" to do something similar to "VACUUM FULL". I don't know if it's the best option, I think others can be found (COMPACT, DEFRAGMENT...)
Of course, for compatibility reasons, VACUUM FULL should always be available, but I think an alias that is less confusing for people could be a good thing.
What do you think ?
Cheers,
Lætitia
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: