Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1ryucL-0014nQ-2o for pgsql-general@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 22 Apr 2024 14:26:01 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1ryucJ-004dxr-Lt for pgsql-general@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 22 Apr 2024 14:25:59 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1ryucJ-004dx3-BB for pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org; Mon, 22 Apr 2024 14:25:59 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([68.162.161.243]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1ryucG-002LDz-Te for pgsql-general@postgresql.org; Mon, 22 Apr 2024 14:25:58 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 43MEPrbG3043220; Mon, 22 Apr 2024 10:25:53 -0400 From: Tom Lane To: Marcos Pegoraro cc: David Rowley , Ron Johnson , pgsql-general Subject: Re: CLUSTER vs. VACUUM FULL In-reply-to: References: <2870091.1713739514@sss.pgh.pa.us> Comments: In-reply-to Marcos Pegoraro message dated "Mon, 22 Apr 2024 08:42:36 -0300" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <3043218.1713795953.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2024 10:25:53 -0400 Message-ID: <3043219.1713795953@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk Marcos Pegoraro writes: > But wouldn't it be good that VACUUM FULL uses that index defined by > Cluster, if it exists ? No ... what would be the difference then? regards, tom lane