Re: Partial vacuum versus pg_class.reltuples

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Partial vacuum versus pg_class.reltuples
Date: 2009-06-08 14:40:10
Message-ID: 20090608144010.GD5598@alvh.no-ip.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane escribió:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> > Robert Haas escribi:
> >> Maybe we should just have a GUC to enable/disable
> >> partial vacuums.
>
> > IIRC you can set vacuum_freeze_table_age to 0.
>
> That has the same effects as issuing VACUUM FREEZE, no?

As far as I can make from the docs, I think it only forces a full table
scan, but the freeze age remains the same.

--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2009-06-08 14:46:39 Re: pg_migrator issue with contrib
Previous Message Tom Lane 2009-06-08 14:34:45 Re: Partial vacuum versus pg_class.reltuples