Re: Feedback on getting rid of VACUUM FULL

On Wed, 2009-09-16 at 21:19 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> writes:
> > What we need is VACUUM FULL CONCURRENTLY and REINDEX CONCURRENTLY.
> 
> VACUUM FULL CONCURRENTLY is a contradiction in terms.  Wishing it were
> possible doesn't make it so.

It depends on what do you mean by "VACUUM FULL"

if VACUUM FULL is just something that works on a table ends up with
(mostly) compacted one, then doing this CONCURRENTLY should not be
impossible. 

If you mean the current version of VACUUM FULL, then this is impossible
indeed.

-- 
Hannu Krosing   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Scalability and Availability   Services, Consulting and Training