On 21 Aug 2003 at 11:01, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 03:40:29PM +1000, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> > Given lazy vacuum doesn't hold locks for long periods, it could be
> > an idea to continuously spend 1% of your disk bandwidth on a
> > background vacuum. As for vacuum full, I don't know if you could do
> > the same thing.
>
> Assuming that one can keep up with the dust bunnies this way, though,
> one wouldn't need to do vacuum full. This would definitely be a way
> cool feature, if implementable.
If a database is clean i.e. no dead tuple, an autovacuum daemon with 1 min
interval can achieve pretty much same result, isn't it?
Bye
Shridhar
--
Drew's Law of Highway Biology: The first bug to hit a clean windshield lands
directly in front of your eyes.
