RE: Why vacuum?
От | Tim Allen |
---|---|
Тема | RE: Why vacuum? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Pine.LNX.4.21.0012141454310.3175-100000@bee.proximity.com.au обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | RE: Why vacuum? ("Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 14 Dec 2000, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: > Plenty of other databases need to be 'vacuumed'. For instance, if you have > an ms access database with 5 MB of data in it, and then delete all the data, > leaving only the forms, etc - you will be left with a 5MB mdb file still! > > If you then run 'Compact Database' (which is another word for 'vacuum'), the > mdb file will be reduced down to 500k... Ooh... Hope MS Access isn't going to be taken seriously as a benchmark here :-). The same is also true of MapInfo, by the way, but I'm not holding that up as a benchmark either ;-). > Chris Tim -- ----------------------------------------------- Tim Allen tim@proximity.com.au Proximity Pty Ltd http://www.proximity.com.au/ http://www4.tpg.com.au/users/rita_tim/
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: