Received: from maia.hub.org (maia-2.hub.org [200.46.204.251]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDAE31337B5D for ; Fri, 17 Dec 2010 12:19:28 -0400 (AST) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.251]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 48259-02 for ; Fri, 17 Dec 2010 16:19:21 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from smtp6-g21.free.fr (smtp6-g21.free.fr [212.27.42.6]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D30B1337B50 for ; Fri, 17 Dec 2010 12:19:19 -0400 (AST) Received: from [192.168.1.3] (unknown [82.233.212.24]) by smtp6-g21.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id D94D782317; Fri, 17 Dec 2010 17:19:13 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <4D0B8D82.6080502@apra.asso.fr> Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 17:19:14 +0100 From: phb07 User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (X11/20101027) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Royce Ausburn CC: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Auto-clustering? References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 tagged_above=-10 required=5 tests=BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 201012/213 X-Sequence-Number: 41665 Royce Ausburn a écrit : > All of the queries on this table are reporting on a single collection, so ideally a collection's data would all be stored in the same part of the disk... or at least clumped together. This can be achieved using "cluster", however as far as I know there's no automated, non-cronesque means of clustering and having the table become unusable during the cluster is not ideal. > > > If the lock level used by CLUSTER is a problem for you, you could consider pg_reorg contrib. AFAIK, it does similar work as CLUSTER but allowing a concurrent read and write activity on the table. Regards. Philippe.