Re: New VACUUM FULL

From: Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: New VACUUM FULL
Date: 2009-12-07 07:55:26
Message-ID: 20091207165526.9550.52131E4D@oss.ntt.co.jp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> You should take those out again; if I am the committer I certainly will.
> Such a test will guarantee complete instability of every other
> regression test, and it's not worth it.

I read the original comment was saying to add regression tests for
database-wide vacuums. But I'll reduce the range of vacuum if they
are not acceptable.

The new patch contains only table-based vacuum for local tables and some of
system tables to test non-INPLACE vacuum are not used for system tables.
VACUUM FULL pg_am;
VACUUM FULL pg_class;
VACUUM FULL pg_database;

Regards,
---
ITAGAKI Takahiro
NTT Open Source Software Center

Attachment Content-Type Size
vacuum-full_20091207a.patch application/octet-stream 40.8 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Simon Riggs 2009-12-07 08:00:33 Re: Reading recovery.conf earlier
Previous Message Pavel Stehule 2009-12-07 07:36:14 Re: named generic constraints [feature request]