| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <munro(at)ip9(dot)org>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: CLUSTER FREEZE |
| Date: | 2013-10-24 23:55:20 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmobvKj=boVCC6HVZ1b0Ut37PrnWn9oGm7TF8uM=HNe6+Yw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:
> On 10/23/2013 09:58 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
>> I wonder why anyone would like to freeze during CLUSTER command when
>> they already have separate way (VACUUM FREEZE) to achieve it, do you
>> know or can think of any case where user wants to do it along with
>> Cluster command?
>
> "If I'm rewriting the table anyway, let's freeze it".
>
> Otherwise, you have to write the same pages twice, if both CLUSTER and
> FREEZE are required.
I wonder if we should go so far as to make this the default behavior,
instead of just making it an option.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2013-10-25 00:17:22 | Re: CLUSTER FREEZE |
| Previous Message | Thomas Munro | 2013-10-24 22:59:56 | Re: CLUSTER FREEZE |