On Sun, Apr 21, 2024 at 6:45 PM Tom Lane <tgl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Ron Johnson <ronljohnsonjr@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Why is VACUUM FULL recommended for compressing a table, when CLUSTER does
> the same thing (similarly doubling disk space), and apparently runs just as
> fast?
CLUSTER makes the additional effort to sort the data per the ordering
of the specified index. I'm surprised that's not noticeable in your
test case.
It's in a freshly restored database. However, regular deletions of old records, and normal vacuums would have led me to expect that the "fresh" public.log would have been in relatively random order.
