Re: VACUUM FULL versus CLUSTER ON

From: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: Sven Willenberger <sven(at)dmv(dot)com>
Subject: Re: VACUUM FULL versus CLUSTER ON
Date: 2006-07-07 17:41:25
Message-ID: 200607071041.25714.jd@commandprompt.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general


> > Sincerely,
> >
> > Joshua D. Drake
>
> Doing a quick check reveals that the relation in question currently
> consumes 186GB of space (which I highly suspect is largely bloat).

Good lord.. .186 gig for a 300 million row table? Unless those are seriously
large rows, you have a TON of bloat.

Joshua D. Drake

--
=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Sven Willenberger 2006-07-07 17:52:58 Re: VACUUM FULL versus CLUSTER ON
Previous Message Franz.Rasper 2006-07-07 17:40:51 Re: VACUUM FULL versus CLUSTER ON