Re: Unexpected VACUUM FULL failure - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Gregory Stark
Subject Re: Unexpected VACUUM FULL failure
Date
Msg-id 87d4xv2cz4.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Unexpected VACUUM FULL failure  ("Simon Riggs" <simon@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: Unexpected VACUUM FULL failure
List pgsql-hackers
"Simon Riggs" <simon@2ndquadrant.com> writes:

> It would be better to release 8.3 with a new, clean, fast implementation
> of VF, than to release it with code that we *think* is right, but has so
> far proved a source of some truly obscure bugs.

Well building a suitable replacement for VACUUM FULL is more work than I was
proposing. The no-op ALTER TABLE rebuild still has the disadvantage of
requiring 2x the space taken by the table (and potentially more if you have
large indexes).

I also think it's a safer course of action to create a new command, spend one
or two releases improving it until we're sure it meets everyone's needs, then
drop the old command.

--  Gregory Stark EnterpriseDB          http://www.enterprisedb.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: regexp_split_to_array hangs backend
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: regexp_matches and regexp_split are inconsistent