Re: why there is not VACUUM FULL CONCURRENTLY?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Alvaro Herrera
Тема Re: why there is not VACUUM FULL CONCURRENTLY?
Дата
Msg-id 202401301137.opydii7tudzt@alvherre.pgsql
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: why there is not VACUUM FULL CONCURRENTLY?  (Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: why there is not VACUUM FULL CONCURRENTLY?  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On 2024-Jan-30, Pavel Stehule wrote:

> some basic variant (without autovacuum support) can be good enough. We have
> no autovacuum support for REINDEX CONCURRENTLY and I don't see a necessity
> for it (sure, it can be limited by my perspective) . The necessity of
> reducing table size is not too common (a lot of use cases are better
> covered by using partitioning), but sometimes it is, and then buildin
> simple available solution can be helpful.

That's my thinking as well.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera         PostgreSQL Developer  —  https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Matthias van de Meent
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Reducing output size of nodeToString
Следующее
От: Alvaro Herrera
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: meson + libpq_pipeline