Re: R: Vacuum full: alternatives? - Mailing list pgsql-general
On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 11:18 AM, Martín Marqués <martin@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
El 20/06/16 a las 12:06, Melvin Davidson escribió:
>
> Martin and Vik,
>
>>...Think about a SELECT which has to scan all child tables.
>
> You are really digging for a corner case.
> If a scan has to scan all child tables, then
> A. it negates the ability to make partitions which are not used
> and
> B. The SELECT query is poorly crafted.
And you haven't read Vik's reply. :)
--
Martín Marqués http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
>And you haven't read Vik's reply. :)
Yes I have. Vacuum wll not lock all tables at once, only the ones it is currently working on, so the planner may have a slight delay,
but it will not be gigantic.
I have proposed a reasonable solution to solve the problem in it's entirety. Do you have a better one?
--
Melvin Davidson
I reserve the right to fantasize. Whether or not you
wish to share my fantasy is entirely up to you.
I reserve the right to fantasize. Whether or not you
wish to share my fantasy is entirely up to you.
pgsql-general by date: