On Sun, Apr 21, 2024 at 6:45 PM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Ron Johnson <ronljohnso...@gmail.com> writes: > > Why is VACUUM FULL recommended for compressing a table, when CLUSTER does > > the same thing (similarly doubling disk space), and apparently runs just > as > > fast? > > CLUSTER makes the additional effort to sort the data per the ordering > of the specified index. I'm surprised that's not noticeable in your > test case. > It's in a freshly restored database. However, regular deletions of old records, and normal vacuums would have led me to expect that the "fresh" public.log would have been in relatively random order.
