Request a Demo
Home   >   mailing lists

Re: why there is not VACUUM FULL CONCURRENTLY? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Marcos Pegoraro
Subject Re: why there is not VACUUM FULL CONCURRENTLY?
Date
Msg-id CAB-JLwZn7Qai1KZks9cuBNoJa9iZjKgG_xjvFyO-VQMFdH=7xg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: why there is not VACUUM FULL CONCURRENTLY?  (Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tree view
Em sex., 10 de jan. de 2025 às 06:31, Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> escreveu:
Thus I understand Alvaro's objections against VACUUM (FULL, CONCURRENTLY).
 
Therefore I can imagine adding a new command that acts like VACUUM (FULL,
CONCURRENTLY), but does not try to be CLUSTER (CONCURRENTL).

If VACUUM FULL and CLUSTER do the same, why not have a single command ?

--VACUUM FULL would be
RECREATE TABLE [ CONCURRENTLY ] table_name
--CLUSTER would be
RECREATE TABLE [ CONCURRENTLY ] table_name CLUSTERED [ON index_name]
--Maybe someday reordering fields would be
RECREATE TABLE [ CONCURRENTLY ] table_name CLUSTERED [ON index_name] [USING FIELDS  (FLD4,FLD5,FLD3,FLD1,FLD2)]

regards
Marcos

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Chiranmoy.Bhattacharya@fujitsu.com"
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Hex-coding optimizations using SVE on ARM.
Next
From: Dean Rasheed
Date:
Subject: Re: psql: Add leakproof field to \dAo+ meta-command results