Re: 3-days-long vacuum of 20GB table

Jeffrey Baker escribió:

> That's rather more like it.  I guess I always imagined that VACUUM was
> a sort of linear process, not random, and that it should proceed at
> sequential scan speeds.

It's linear for the table, but there are p***** for indexes which are
random in 8.1.  That code was rewritten by Heikki Lin****angas to do
linear p***** for indexes in 8.2 AFAIR.

-- 
Alvaro Herrera                               
http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.

-- 
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance