Re: R: Vacuum full: alternatives?
| От | Alex Ignatov |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: R: Vacuum full: alternatives? |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 0ff62839-a697-e5bd-84b1-be2430aa4a26@postgrespro.ru обсуждение |
| Ответ на | Re: R: Vacuum full: alternatives? (Vik Fearing <vik@2ndquadrant.fr>) |
| Список | pgsql-general |
On 20.06.2016 17:30, Vik Fearing wrote:
> On 20/06/16 16:23, Martín Marqués wrote:
>> El 20/06/16 a las 09:50, Melvin Davidson escribió:
>>>
>>>> but it won't let it grow too (or am I missing something).
>>> Yes, you are missing something. By partioning and {Vacuum Full only the
>>> table with data no longer needed}, the rest of the data remains
>>> available to the users
>>> AND space is reclaimed by the O/S, so it's the best of both worlds.
>> That's not entirely true. Think about a SELECT which has to scan all
>> child tables.
> Or any SELECT on the parent at all. The planner needs to examine the
> CHECK constraints on the children and can't do it if the child is locked
> in ACCESS EXCLUSIVE mode.
+1
Alex Ignatov
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: