From: Bruno Wolff III <bruno@wolff.to>
To: Markus Benne <markus@m-bass.com>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: VACUUM FULL vs CLUSTER
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2005 09:20:27 -0500
Message-ID: <20050923142027.GC2298@wolff.to> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1127242399.26562.15.camel@host-140.engineering.n-able.com>
References: <5.2.0.9.1.20050920144041.0287c300@pop.puc.cl>
<1127242399.26562.15.camel@host-140.engineering.n-able.com>
On Tue, Sep 20, 2005 at 14:53:19 -0400,
Markus Benne <markus@m-bass.com> wrote:
> I have a table that is purged by 25% each night. I'd like to do a
> vacuum nightly after the purge to reclaim the space, but I think I'll
> still need to do a vacuum full weekly.
>
> Would there be any benefit to doing a cluster instead of the vacuum?
If you have a proper FSM setting you shouldn't need to do vacuum fulls
(unless you have an older version of postgres where index bloat might
be an issue).
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: bruno@wolff.to, markus@m-bass.com
Subject: Re: VACUUM FULL vs CLUSTER
In-Reply-To: <20050923142027.GC2298@wolff.to>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox