"Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Another argument is that VACUUM FULL is a dinosaur that should probably > go away entirely someday (a view I believe you share); it should > therefore not be allowed to drive the design of other parts of the > system.
Incidentally, every time it comes up we recommend using CLUSTER or ALTER TABLE. And explaining the syntax for ALTER TABLE is always a bit fiddly. I wonder if it would make sense to add a "VACUUM REWRITE" which just did the same as the noop ALTER TABLE we're recommending people do anyways. Then we could have a HINT from VACUUM FULL which suggests considering VACUUM REWRITE. I would think this would be 8.4 stuff except if all we want it to do is a straight noop alter table it's pretty trivial. The hardest part is coming up with a name for it. -- Gregory Stark EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
