Re: Proposal "VACUUM SCHEMA"
| От | Fabrízio de Royes Mello |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Proposal "VACUUM SCHEMA" |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAFcNs+pE=Sdi_s8E0Y449U_nerfRXmOyBMSg4UtW7o+bY1HyTQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Proposal "VACUUM SCHEMA" (Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@BlueTreble.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Proposal "VACUUM SCHEMA"
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Em terça-feira, 23 de dezembro de 2014, Jim Nasby <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 the thread 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 background worker work?
Interesting idea.
But and what about the idea of improve the "--table" option from clients: vaccumdb and clusterdb?
Regards,
Fabrízio Mello
--
Fabrízio de Royes Mello
Consultoria/Coaching PostgreSQL
Consultoria/Coaching PostgreSQL
>> Timbira: http://www.timbira.com.br
>> Blog: http://fabriziomello.github.io
>> Linkedin: http://br.linkedin.com/in/fabriziomello
>> Twitter: http://twitter.com/fabriziomello
>> Blog: http://fabriziomello.github.io
>> Linkedin: http://br.linkedin.com/in/fabriziomello
>> Twitter: http://twitter.com/fabriziomello
>> Github: http://github.com/fabriziomello
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: