On Wed, 2005-12-07 at 09:55 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > We discussed an optimization of VACUUM here > > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2005-09/msg00046.php > > that would allow VACUUM to complete faster by avoiding scanning the > > indexes when no rows were removed from the heap by the VACUUM.
resolved. > > Unfortunately I can't read that message right now because archives > isn't responding, but this seems like a pretty bad idea to me. > You still have to do the vacuum cleanup pass (at least in the btree > case, and the only reason gist doesn't need it is it's not yet up > to speed) so there's no real savings. > > regards, tom lane > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend -- The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. 1.503.667.4564 PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting Co-Authors: PLphp, PLperl, ODBCng - http://www.commandprompt.com/ ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
