Re: select count(*) performance (vacuum did not help)

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Csaba Nagy
Тема Re: select count(*) performance (vacuum did not help)
Дата
Msg-id 1190648056.4661.251.camel@PCD12478
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: select count(*) performance (vacuum did not help)  (Gábor Farkas <gabor@nekomancer.net>)
Список pgsql-performance
On Mon, 2007-09-24 at 17:14 +0200, Gábor Farkas wrote:
> will i achieve the same thing by simply dropping that table and
> re-creating it?

If you have an index/PK on that table, the fastest and most useful way
to rebuild it is to do CLUSTER on that index. That will be a lot faster
than VACUUM FULL and it will also order your table in index order... but
it will also lock it in exclusive mode just as VACUUM FULL would do it.
If your table has just a few live rows and lots of junk in it, CLUSTER
should be fast enough. With 20K entries I would expect it to be fast
enough not to be a problem...

Cheers,
Csaba.



В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: "Alexander Staubo"
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: TEXT or LONGTEXT?
Следующее
От: "Dave Dutcher"
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: select count(*) performance (vacuum did not help)