Postgres Pro
Downloads
Home   >   mailing lists

Re: double vacuum in initdb - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: double vacuum in initdb
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoYVNQmDHuHEuDLyX=dbgEo=1BSceC9+4fO+hR1n1B5u5Q@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to double vacuum in initdb  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tree view 
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 8:50 PM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> wrote:
>     In an unrelated change, use VACUUM FULL; VACUUM FREEZE; rather than
>     a single VACUUM FULL FREEZE command, to respond to my worries of a
>     couple days ago about the reliability of doing this in one go.
>
> That was a long time ago.  Is that still applicable?

Gosh, I hope not.  Note that that was back when we still had old-style
VACUUM FULL, which was significantly more fragile than what we've got
now, I think...

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Mark Dilger
Date:
Subject: WRITE_UINT_FIELD used where WRITE_OID_FIELD likely intended
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: PATCH: hashjoin - gracefully increasing NTUP_PER_BUCKET instead of batching