Greg Stark wrote: > The use cases where VACUUM FULL wins currently are where storing two > copies of the table and its indexes concurrently just isn't practical.
Yeah, but then do you really need to use VACUUM FULL? If that's really a problem then there ain't that many dead tuples around. > Also perhaps tables where there are too many large indexes to make > rebuilding them all in one maintenance window practical. If that's the concern maybe we oughta do something about concurrently re-creating those indexes somehow. Plain REINDEX doesn't work of course, but maybe we can do some trick with creating a new index and dropping the original one afterwards. -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/ PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
