Re: Effects of dropping a large table - Mailing list pgsql-general

From David Rowley
Subject Re: Effects of dropping a large table
Date
Msg-id CAApHDvojNTFb=A1zE7oiz02JaHkp2f8q=C8SOd+QwvwJYV2cLQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Effects of dropping a large table  (Rob Sargent <robjsargent@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Effects of dropping a large table  (Rob Sargent <robjsargent@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-general
On Wed, 19 Jul 2023 at 07:41, Rob Sargent <robjsargent@gmail.com> wrote:
> You might consider deleting portions of the table in separate (consecutive) batches (maybe 5% per delete).  And then
truncatetable is not logged so that might be an alternative.
 

Can you explain why this would be a useful thing to do?

It sounds to me like it would just create a load of needless WAL from
the deletes and the vacuum that cleans up the dead rows each of which
is more likely to cause lag problems on the replica servers, which the
OP is trying to avoid.

David



pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: suggestion about time based partitioning and hibernate
Next
From: Rob Sargent
Date:
Subject: Re: Effects of dropping a large table