Re: vacuum vs pg_repack for clearing bloat?
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: vacuum vs pg_repack for clearing bloat? |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 6239.1389831842@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | vacuum vs pg_repack for clearing bloat? (Lists <lists@benjamindsmith.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: vacuum vs pg_repack for clearing bloat?
|
| Список | pgsql-general |
Lists <lists@benjamindsmith.com> writes:
> Our app makes extensive use of temp tables, and this causes a
> significant amount of bloat that can often only be cleared with a manual
> vacuum process. We're looking for a better way that doesn't involve
> locking, we found pg_repack and pg_reorg and were wondering if anybody
> here could weigh in on using this instead of using vacuum?
A temp table is only accessible to the owning process, so if you're hoping
for vacuuming of it to happen silently in background, you'll be sadly
disappointed. The speed advantage of a temp table come exactly from not
having to worry about concurrent access, so this isn't a tradeoff that can
easily be adjusted.
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: