Re: [doc patch] a slight VACUUM / VACUUM FULL doc improvement proposal

On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 12:09:26PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>Maybe, but we should also mention that CLUSTER is a likely faster
>workaround.

Unless, of course, you don't particularly care about the order of the
items in your table; you might end up wasting vastly more time rewriting
tables due to unnecessary clustering than for full vacuums on a table
that doesn't need it.

Mike Stone