Thanks Greg ! If i got it correct, CLUSTER would do the same what VACUUM FULL does (except being fast).
CLUSTER is recommended only because it is faster ? As per the link, the table would be unavailable (for shorter period compared to VACUUM FULL) when CLUSTER is executed as well. Hope i got it correct ! Thanks Venkat On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 11:27 PM, Greg Smith <g...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On 09/21/2011 12:13 PM, Venkat Balaji wrote: > >> I as a DBA, suggested to perform VACUUM FULL and RE-INDEXING + ANALYZE to >> ensure that IO performance and Indexing performance would be good >> > > > Read > http://wiki.postgresql.org/**wiki/VACUUM_FULL<http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/VACUUM_FULL>before > you run VACUUM FULL. You probably don't want to do that. A > multi-gigabyte table can easily be unavailable for several hours if you > execute VACUUM FULL against it. CLUSTER is almost always faster. > > -- > Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant US g...@2ndquadrant.com Baltimore, MD > PostgreSQL Training, Services, and 24x7 Support www.2ndQuadrant.us > > > > -- > Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.** > org <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/**mailpref/pgsql-performance<http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance> >
