On 14/11/2009 11:55 AM, Scott Marlowe wrote: > On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 8:31 PM, Craig Ringer > <craig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 13/11/2009 2:29 PM, Dave Crooke wrote: >> >>> Beware that VACUUM FULL locks an entire table at a time :-) >> >> ... and often bloats its indexes horribly. Use CLUSTER instead if you >> need to chop a table that's massively bloated down to size; it'll be >> much faster, and shouldn't leave the indexes in a mess. >> >> I increasingly wonder what the purpose of VACUUM FULL in its current >> form is. > > There's been talk of removing it. It's almost historical in nature > now, but there are apparently one or two situations, like when you're > almost out of space, that vacuum full can handle that dumping reload > or cluster or whatnot can't do without more extra space. Perhaps it should drop and re-create indexes as well, then? (Or disable them so they become inconsistent, then REINDEX them - same deal). It'd run a LOT faster, and the index bloat issue would be gone. The current form of the command just invites misuse and misapplication. -- Craig Ringer -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
