Re: Vacum Analyze problem
От
Gregory Stark
Тема
Re: Vacum Analyze problem
Дата
Msg-id
87bqci580f.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com
Ответ на
Список
Дерево обсуждения
Vacum Analyze problem <rafael@akyasociados.com.ar>
Re: Vacum Analyze problem Kevin Kempter <kevin@kevinkempterllc.com>
Re: Vacum Analyze problem <rafael@akyasociados.com.ar>
Re: Vacum Analyze problem Richard Broersma Jr <rabroersma@yahoo.com>
Re: Vacum Analyze problem Bill Moran <wmoran@collaborativefusion.com>
Re: Vacum Analyze problem "Mikko Partio" <mpartio@gmail.com>
Re: Vacum Analyze problem <rafael@akyasociados.com.ar>
Re: Vacum Analyze problem Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com>
writes: > I knew that in the long run the VACUUM ANALYZE comand has to be executed > again. My question is if something can happen over night and cause the need > of a new VACUUM ANALYZE (regenerating indexes or other thing related with > performance). The answer to your question is possibly yes for two reasons: 1) If you're running an autovacuum daemon it might decide it's time to vacuum the table and kick off a vacuum. That sounds most like what you're describing. 2) If the size of the table changes substantially becoming much larger (or smaller but that wouldn't happen just due to deletes unless you run vacuum) then recent versions of Postgres will notice even if you don't run analyze and take that into account. -- Gregory Stark EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления