Re: [HACKERS] tables > 1 gig

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: [HACKERS] tables > 1 gig
Дата
Msg-id 4269.929632929@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] tables > 1 gig  (Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>)
Ответы Re: [HACKERS] tables > 1 gig  (Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> ... nor do I understand why more people aren't
> complaining about not being able to vacuum tables that are 1.5 gigs that
> they used to be able to vacuum.

Most likely, not very many people with tables that big have adopted 6.5
yet ... if I were running a big site, I'd probably wait for 6.5.1 on
general principles ;-)

I think what we ought to do is finish working out how to make mdtruncate
safe for concurrent backends, and then do it.  That's the right
long-term answer anyway.
        regards, tom lane


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] tables > 1 gig
Следующее
От: Bruce Momjian
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] tables > 1 gig