Re: VACUUM FULL versus CLUSTER ON - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Joshua D. Drake
Subject Re: VACUUM FULL versus CLUSTER ON
Date
Msg-id 200607071041.25714.jd@commandprompt.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: VACUUM FULL versus CLUSTER ON  (Sven Willenberger <sven@dmv.com>)
Responses Re: VACUUM FULL versus CLUSTER ON  (Sven Willenberger <sven@dmv.com>)
List pgsql-general
> > Sincerely,
> >
> > Joshua D. Drake
>
> Doing a quick check reveals that the relation in question currently
> consumes 186GB of space (which I highly suspect is largely bloat).

Good lord.. .186 gig for a 300 million row table? Unless those are seriously
large rows, you have a TON of bloat.

Joshua D. Drake

--
   === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
   Providing the most comprehensive  PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
             http://www.commandprompt.com/



pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Sven Willenberger
Date:
Subject: Re: VACUUM FULL versus CLUSTER ON
Next
From: Franz.Rasper@izb.de
Date:
Subject: Re: VACUUM FULL versus CLUSTER ON