Re: Vacuum improvement

On Wed, 2002-10-16 at 12:33, David Walker wrote:
> Vacuum full locks the whole table currently.  I was thinking if you used a 
> similar to a hard drive defragment that only 2 rows would need to be locked 
> at a time.  When you're done vacuum/defragmenting you shorten the file to 
> discard the dead tuples that are located after your useful data.  There might 
> be a need to lock the table for a little while at the end but it seems like 
> you could reduce that time greatly.
> 
> I had one table that is heavily updated and it grew to 760 MB even with 
> regular vacuuming.  A vacuum full reduced it to 1.1 MB.  I am running 7.2.0 
> (all my vacuuming is done by superuser).
> 

Not that I'm against the idea, but isn't this just a sign that your just
not vacuuming frequently enough?  

Robert Treat