Re: Proposal "VACUUM SCHEMA"

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Robert Haas
Тема Re: Proposal "VACUUM SCHEMA"
Дата
Msg-id CA+TgmoYCG00YHq0zAnkCTD6S6Znt+LSC2mon3HGsG7CsHNRJpw@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Proposal "VACUUM SCHEMA"  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
Ответы Re: Proposal "VACUUM SCHEMA"  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 11:51 AM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> Multi-table CLUSTER uses multiple transactions, so this should not be an
> issue.  That said, I don't think there's much point in CLUSTER SCHEMA,
> much less TRUNCATE SCHEMA.  Do you normally organize your schemas so
> that there are some that contain only tables that need to be truncated
> together?  That would be a strange use case.
>
> Overall, this whole line of development seems like bloating the parse
> tables for little gain.

We added REINDEX SCHEMA less than three weeks ago; if we accept that
that was a good change, but think this is a bad one, it's not clear to
me that there is any guiding principle here beyond who happened to
weigh in on which threads.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Robert Haas
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Final Patch for GROUPING SETS
Следующее
От: Michael Paquier
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [bug fix or improvement?] Correctly place DLLs for ECPG apps in bin folder