Re: automatic REINDEX-ing

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Kevin Hunter
Тема Re: automatic REINDEX-ing
Дата
Msg-id 48A316D3.7070608@earlham.edu
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: automatic REINDEX-ing  (Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org>)
Ответы Re: automatic REINDEX-ing  (Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org>)
Re: automatic REINDEX-ing  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Список pgsql-general
At 12:53p -0400 on Wed, 13 Aug 2008, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 12:41:41PM -0400, Kevin Hunter wrote:
>> Roughly, VACUUM simply reclaims/frees disk space, while VACUUM FULL
>> additionally reorganizes disk usage.  I'm still don't know *why* this
>> leads to index bloat, however, just that it does.  I must defer that
>> explication to a Postgres guru.
>
> Because VACUUM FULL needs to move stuff around in the table which means it
> need to mess around with the indexes (adding new entries). Ordinary
> VACUUM only needs to delete stuff so doesn't cause anywhere near as
> many problems.

Hmm.  I get the reorganization bit, but so what?  Since VACUUM FULL
already has an exclusive lock, what prevents it from updating the
indexes in-place to point to the new physical disk location?  Why does
it need to create extra bloat?

Or, failing that, what's the reason to not issue a REINDEX CONCURRENTLY
automatically after a VACUUM FULL (or something to that effect)?

Kevin

В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Martijn van Oosterhout
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Column alias in where clause?
Следующее
От: Jeff Ross
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Column alias in where clause?