Re: Doubt w.r.t vacuum
От | Shridhar Daithankar |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Doubt w.r.t vacuum |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3F257189.28699.9130C3@localhost обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Doubt w.r.t vacuum (Doug McNaught <doug@mcnaught.org>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 28 Jul 2003 at 9:11, Doug McNaught wrote: > "Shridhar Daithankar" <shridhar_daithankar@persistent.co.in> writes: > > > Hi, > > > > I was just wondering over it. This is for difference between vacuum full and > > vacuum analyze. Can somebody enlighten, > > > > 1. IIRC vacuum recovers/reuses dead tuples generated from update but can not do > > so for delete? Why? > > YDNRC. You did not read... C for what? Code? > > > 2. Vacuum full locks entire table, is it possible that it locks a > > page at a time and deal with it. It will make vacuum full > > non-blocking at the cost of letting it run for a longer time. Or is > > it that the defragmentation algorithm needs more than a page? > > This I don't know, but I imagine that if what you suggest was easy to > do it would have been done, and there would have been no need for two > different kinds of VACUUM. I went thr. the code, although vbery briefly but I can imagine that code being dependent upon tons of other things. Didn't understand everything so left it as it is.. ByeShridhar -- Mix's Law: There is nothing more permanent than a temporary building. There is nothing more permanent than a temporary tax.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: