Re: truncate vs. delete - Mailing list pgsql-sql

From Emi Lu
Subject Re: truncate vs. delete
Date
Msg-id 48889377.7080804@encs.concordia.ca
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: truncate vs. delete  ("A. Kretschmer" <andreas.kretschmer@schollglas.com>)
List pgsql-sql
A. Kretschmer wrote:
> am  Thu, dem 24.07.2008, um 10:01:46 -0400 mailte Emi Lu folgendes:
>> A. Kretschmer wrote:
>>> am  Thu, dem 24.07.2008, um  9:47:48 -0400 mailte Emi Lu folgendes:
>>>> I found a link for SQL Server, it applies to PostgreSQL 8.0.x as well?
>>>> http://vadivel.blogspot.com/2004/06/delete-vs-truncate-statement.html
>>> Not realy, for instance, pg can rollback a truncate, and a sequence are
>>> not reset.
>>>
>>>
>> Thank you. I am quite sure that I will not use "delete" now.
>> Now I a question about how efficient between
>>
>> (1) truncate a big table (with 200, 000)
>>     vacuum it (optional?)
> 
> not required
> 
> 
>>     drop primary key
>>     load new data
>>     load primary ke
>>     vacuum it
> 
> analyse it, instead vacuum.

It gets more and more clear to me know!

I guess I need only do analyze(primary key column) after loading data.
The new picture will be:
. truncate table
. drop primary key
. load data
. set primary key
. analyze interesting columns











pgsql-sql by date:

Previous
From: "Scott Marlowe"
Date:
Subject: Re: truncate vs. delete
Next
From: Shane Ambler
Date:
Subject: Re: truncate vs. delete