Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Tom Lane writes:
>
> > > for d in $(psql -l --somthing); do vacuum $d; done
> > If you have a real shell (and know how to use it), sure. Is such a
> > solution acceptable to all those Windows users we're hoping to attract?
>
> I don't know how Windows users typically manage their systems, but if they
> use batch files they can also write a similar loop with the native shell.
> (I just tried it.)
>
> My problem with a program that runs a command for all databases is that it
> is too rigid: What if you want to run maintenance only on some databases
> (owned by you, big/small, even/odd, starting with 'x')? --- Cannot use
> it, back to the manual approach.
My assumption was that if you wanted only a few databases, you would use
psql. I see the only major advantage to the vacuumdb-like commands is
doing all databases. Are there other advantages?
-- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610)
359-1001+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073