mikeo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> after about 50,000 updates, which fly right along, the process begins
> to really bog down. we perform a vacuum analzye and it speeds right
> up again.
A plain "vacuum" should do the job in a bit less time. The problem
is you need to reclaim the space occupied by deleted versions of rows.
No way around that with the current storage manager: vacuum is the
only way to get rid of the wasted space.
regards, tom lane
- [SQL] Function-based index not used in a simple query Rostislav Opocensky
- Re: [SQL] Function-based index not used in a simp... Tom Lane
- Re: [SQL] Function-based index not used in a ... Rostislav Opocensky
- Re: [SQL] Function-based index not used i... Tom Lane
- [SQL] short query becomes long mikeo
- Tom Lane
