> It does no such thing. The only difference is that it's willing to move
> a few tuples around if it can thereby free up (and truncate) whole pages
> at the end of the table. (In a live system you'd better hope it's only
> a few tuples, anyway ;-) ... or you'll be waiting a long time.) It
> doesn't even do a complete defrag; it stops moving tuples as soon as it
> finds that it won't be able to truncate the table any further. So
> there's *not* that much difference.
>
> > VACUUM DEFRAG?
> > VACUUM COMPRESS?
>
> While these look kinda ugly to me, I can find no stronger objection than
> that. (Well, maybe I could complain that these overstate what old-style
> vacuum actually does, but that's even weaker.) What do other people
> think?
I kind of like COMPRESS, though VACUUM NOLOCK can do compress sometimes
too. That gets confusing. That's why I hit on LOCK. I couldn't think
of another _unique_ thing old vacuum did.
-- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610)
853-3000+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026