Re: double vacuum in initdb

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Robert Haas
Тема Re: double vacuum in initdb
Дата
Msg-id CA+TgmoYVNQmDHuHEuDLyX=dbgEo=1BSceC9+4fO+hR1n1B5u5Q@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на double vacuum in initdb  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Дерево обсуждения 
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 8:50 PM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> wrote:
>     In an unrelated change, use VACUUM FULL; VACUUM FREEZE; rather than
>     a single VACUUM FULL FREEZE command, to respond to my worries of a
>     couple days ago about the reliability of doing this in one go.
>
> That was a long time ago.  Is that still applicable?

Gosh, I hope not.  Note that that was back when we still had old-style
VACUUM FULL, which was significantly more fragile than what we've got
now, I think...

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

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Mark Dilger
Дата:
Сообщение: WRITE_UINT_FIELD used where WRITE_OID_FIELD likely intended
Следующее
От: Robert Haas
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: PATCH: hashjoin - gracefully increasing NTUP_PER_BUCKET instead of batching