From: Michael Stone <mstone+postgres@mathom.us>
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [doc patch] a slight VACUUM / VACUUM FULL doc improvement proposal
Date: Wed, 16 May 2007 12:20:38 -0400
Message-ID: <20070516162035.GI1785@mathom.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070516160926.GX4582@alvh.no-ip.org>
References: <87lkfqavg9.fsf@meuh.mnc.lan>
<20070515174427.GG1785@mathom.us>
<87hcqdb4g5.fsf@meuh.mnc.lan>
<20070516154809.GL14548@nasby.net>
<877ir892ss.fsf@meuh.mnc.lan>
<20070516160926.GX4582@alvh.no-ip.org>
On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 12:09:26PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>Maybe, but we should also mention that CLUSTER is a likely faster
>workaround.
Unless, of course, you don't particularly care about the order of the
items in your table; you might end up wasting vastly more time rewriting
tables due to unnecessary clustering than for full vacuums on a table
that doesn't need it.
Mike Stone
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: mstone+postgres@mathom.us
Subject: Re: [doc patch] a slight VACUUM / VACUUM FULL doc improvement proposal
In-Reply-To: <20070516162035.GI1785@mathom.us>
* 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