Alban Hertroys wrote:
> Gábor Farkas wrote:
>
>> i'm only afraid that maybe if we issue the drop-db command, it will
>> take for example 30minutes...
>
>
> Wouldn't it be more effective to create a new table by selecting your
> session table and switch their names? You can drop the troublesome table
> afterwards, without influencing the availability of your database any
> further.
>
> This should minimize your downtime, I think - unless people have even
> speedier solutions, of course.
>
thanks, but what my fear is:
as i understand, this little db eats up 30GB of space (the real content
should be like 10MB), because it was not vacuumed for a long time.
but a normal vacuum does not recover disk space, it still keeps it.
we need to do a different vacuum that recovers the disk space, but for
that time the db will not respond.
so, what if simply dropping the table does not recover the disk-space?
thanks,
gabo
