Re: select count(*) performance (vacuum did not help) - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Csaba Nagy
Subject Re: select count(*) performance (vacuum did not help)
Date
Msg-id 1190648056.4661.251.camel@PCD12478
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: select count(*) performance (vacuum did not help)  (Gábor Farkas <gabor@nekomancer.net>)
List pgsql-performance
On Mon, 2007-09-24 at 17:14 +0200, Gábor Farkas wrote:
> will i achieve the same thing by simply dropping that table and
> re-creating it?

If you have an index/PK on that table, the fastest and most useful way
to rebuild it is to do CLUSTER on that index. That will be a lot faster
than VACUUM FULL and it will also order your table in index order... but
it will also lock it in exclusive mode just as VACUUM FULL would do it.
If your table has just a few live rows and lots of junk in it, CLUSTER
should be fast enough. With 20K entries I would expect it to be fast
enough not to be a problem...

Cheers,
Csaba.



pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: "Alexander Staubo"
Date:
Subject: Re: TEXT or LONGTEXT?
Next
From: "Dave Dutcher"
Date:
Subject: Re: select count(*) performance (vacuum did not help)