Hackers, Here's the feedback on replacing VACUUM FULL with VACUUM REWRITE: http://it.toolbox.com/blogs/database-soup/getting-rid-of-vacuum-full-feedback-needed-33959
Of note: a) To date, I have yet to hear a single person bring up an actual real-life use-case where VACUUM FULL was desireable and REWRITE would not be. Lots of people have said something hypothetical, but nobody has come forward with a "I have this database X and several times Y happened, and only FULL would work ...". This makes me think that there very likey are no actual use cases where we need to preserve FULL. b) Several people have strongly pushed for a phased removal of FULL over more than one PG version, with a warning message about depreciation. c) Vivek had some points about required implementation: "However, there still must be a way to compact the tables that is mvcc safe. From what I have read and recall, cluster is not. Thus, the vacuum rewrite would be a mandatory feature (or cluster could be made mvcc safe)." Is Vivek correct about this? News to me ... -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. www.pgexperts.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
