Re: Proposal "VACUUM SCHEMA" - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Fabrízio de Royes Mello
Subject Re: Proposal "VACUUM SCHEMA"
Date
Msg-id CAFcNs+rKYqKdkF6cuvKM4e3UBKGGmmzVJxOFy=s=tP4Aw46-+g@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread
In response to Re: Proposal "VACUUM SCHEMA"  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Proposal "VACUUM SCHEMA"
Re: Proposal "VACUUM SCHEMA"
List pgsql-hackers

On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 5:18 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>
> Fabrízio de Royes Mello <fabriziomello@gmail.com> writes:
> > I work with some customer that have databases with a lot of schemas and
> > sometimes we need to run manual VACUUM in one schema, and would be nice to
> > have a new option to run vacuum in relations from a specific schema.
>
> I'm pretty skeptical of this alleged use-case.  Manual vacuuming ought
> to be mostly a thing of the past, and even if it's not, hitting
> *everything* in a schema should seldom be an appropriate thing to do.
>

I agree manual vacuum is a thing of the past, but autovacuum doesn't solve 100% of the cases, and sometimes we need to use it so my proposal is just do help DBAs and/or Sysadmins to write simple maintenance scripts.


> While the feature itself might be fairly innocuous, I'm just wondering
> why we need to encourage manual vacuuming. 

IMHO we will not encourage manual vacuuming, just give more flexibility to users.


> And why that, but not
> say schema-wide ANALYZE, CLUSTER, TRUNCATE, ...
>

+1. I can write patches for each of this maintenance statement too.

Regards,

--
Fabrízio de Royes Mello
Consultoria/Coaching PostgreSQL
>> Timbira: http://www.timbira.com.br
>> Blog: http://fabriziomello.github.io
>> Linkedin: http://br.linkedin.com/in/fabriziomello
>> Twitter: http://twitter.com/fabriziomello
>> Github: http://github.com/fabriziomello

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Noah Misch
Date:
Subject: Re: Final Patch for GROUPING SETS
Next
From: Tatsuo Ishii
Date:
Subject: Re: pgbench -f and vacuum