Re: A 154 GB table swelled to 527 GB on the Slony slave. How to compact it? - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Vick Khera
Subject Re: A 154 GB table swelled to 527 GB on the Slony slave. How to compact it?
Date
Msg-id CALd+dcdFgBv9W5WiLsuF_6qZ6rmzKoj31YLV2NzAajFvfcmB-g@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: A 154 GB table swelled to 527 GB on the Slony slave. How to compact it?  (Nur Hidayat <hidayat365@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: A 154 GB table swelled to 527 GB on the Slony slave. How to compact it?
List pgsql-general
On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 3:06 AM, Nur Hidayat <hidayat365@gmail.com> wrote:
> I once have the same problem. In my case it's because most of my table using
> text datatype.
> When I change the field type to character varying (1000) database size
> reduced significantly

I'll bet what happened was postgres re-wrote your table for you,
effectively doing a compaction.  You can get similar effect by doing
an alter table and "changing" an INTEGER field to be INTEGER.
Postgres does not optimize that do a no-op, so you get the re-writing
effect.

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Martin Gregorie
Date:
Subject: Re: How to find compiled-in default port number?
Next
From: Adrian Klaver
Date:
Subject: Re: How to find compiled-in default port number?