Re: "vacuum" and "cluster" - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Jimmy Choi
Subject Re: "vacuum" and "cluster"
Date
Msg-id 5770602b0804161221u1bda561cr71349626d268742d@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: "vacuum" and "cluster"  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>)
Responses Re: "vacuum" and "cluster"  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>)
List pgsql-general
Presumably, even if CLUSTER does reindexing internally, it only does
that for the index used for clustering. Since REINDEX includes all
indices, CLUSTER cannot truly replace REINDEX. Correct?

Jimmy

On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 12:06 PM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre@commandprompt.com> wrote:
> Craig Ringer escribió:
>
>
>  > It's not stated explicitly, but I'm pretty sure discussion here has
>  > mentioned that too. Given that, VACUUM FULL on a just-CLUSTERed table
>  > should be redundant.
>
>  It is, and a REINDEX is redundant too because CLUSTER does it
>  internally.
>
>  --
>  Alvaro Herrera                                http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
>  PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
>

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Sam Mason
Date:
Subject: Re: Storage sizes for dates/times (documentation bug?)
Next
From: "David Wilson"
Date:
Subject: Re: table as log (multiple writers and readers)