Re: [HACKERS] VACUUM FULL during initdb
Takahiro Itagaki writes: > Do we still need VACUUM FULL in initdb? VACUUM FULL in 9.0 rewrites > all tables, so those operations are a little more expensive than > previous releases. Is it worth replacing them into VACUUM? I had left it that way intentionally to make sure there was nothing depending on catalogs retaining their original relfilenode number. I'm not sure that speed of initdb is a particularly significant factor. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
[HACKERS] VACUUM FULL during initdb
Do we still need VACUUM FULL in initdb? VACUUM FULL in 9.0 rewrites all tables, so those operations are a little more expensive than previous releases. Is it worth replacing them into VACUUM? make_template0(void) Finally vacuum to clean up dead rows in pg_database "VACUUM FULL pg_database;\n", vacuum_db(void) PG_CMD_PUTS("ANALYZE;\nVACUUM FULL;\nVACUUM FREEZE;\n"); Regards, --- Takahiro Itagaki NTT Open Source Software Center -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers