Re: A 154 GB table swelled to 527 GB on the Slony slave. How to compact it?

On 03/12/12 12:06 AM, Nur Hidayat wrote:
>
> I once have the same problem. In my case it's because most of my table
> using text datatype.
> When I change the field type to character varying (1000) database size
> reduced significantly
>
> Unfortunately, I haven't investigate more, but it looks like how
> postgres stores data

that doesn't make any sense.   text and character varying storage is
exactly hte same, the only difference is the varchar has an optional
length constraint



--
john r pierce                            N 37, W 122
santa cruz ca                         mid-left coast