Stephen Frost wrote: > * Andres Freund (and...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote: > > There's one argument for supporting more for VACUUM than the rest - it > > can't be executed directly as the result of a query as the others > > can... I wonder if that'd not better be answered by adding a feature to > > vacuumdb that allows selecting the to-be-vacuumed table by a user > > defined query. > > Wow. That's certainly an interesting idea.
+1. > We might end up turning the autovacuum process into a generalized > scheduler/cron-like entity that way though. I'd rather we just build > that. Users would then be able to run a script periodically which > would add VACUUM commands to be run on whichever tables they want to > the jobs queue, either for immediate execution or at whatever time they > want (or possibly chronically :). This too. I think there's one or two orders of magnitude of difference in implementation effort of these two ideas, however. -- Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
