Re: LARGE db dump/restore for upgrade question
| От | wsheldah@lexmark.com |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: LARGE db dump/restore for upgrade question |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 200108151801.OAA20301@interlock2.lexmark.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | LARGE db dump/restore for upgrade question (Philip Crotwell <crotwell@seis.sc.edu>) |
| Список | pgsql-general |
If there were lots of inserts, I would guess it would need to re-analyze the
tables to update its statistics on them, so the query optimizer can make good
choices.
--Wes
Philip Crotwell <crotwell%seis.sc.edu@interlock.lexmark.com> on 08/15/2001
01:08:19 PM
To: Joseph Shraibman <jks%selectacast.net@interlock.lexmark.com>
cc: pgsql-general%postgresql.org@interlock.lexmark.com (bcc: Wesley
Sheldahl/Lex/Lexmark)
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] LARGE db dump/restore for upgrade question
Hi
Just did a vacuum, took almost 4 hours. The interesting thing about this
is that there are only two small tables that have updates, everything else
has been just inserts. I would have thought that a vacuum of a database
shouldn't take very long if there aren't alot of "deleted" rows.
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: