On Tue, 2007-12-11 at 13:44 +0100, Csaba Nagy wrote:
> Another advantage I guess would be that active data would more likely
> stay in cache, as updated records would stay together and not spread
> over the inactive.
And I forgot to mention that vacuum could mostly skip the archive part,
and only vacuum the active part, which would drastically reduce the cost
of vacuuming big & active tables.
Cheers,
Csaba.
