Andrew Sullivan a écrit :

On Sun, Feb 29, 2004 at 10:43:34AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:


general I think our VACUUM-based approach is superior to the
Oracle-style UNDO approach, because it pushes the maintenance overhead
out of foreground transaction processing and into a schedulable
background process. Certainly any Oracle DBA will tell you that huge



I completely agree with this. If the recent work on lowering the overall cost ov VACUUM on loaded systems pays off, then I think there can be no argument that the work-now, vacuum-later strategy is the best approach, simply because it deals with the outlying and unexpected cases better than the alternatives. I know too many people who have been burned by running out of rollback segments when some use pattern emerged that they hadn't planned for.

A

I agree too. The VACUUM aproach is better as it reduces fragmentation and chained rows due to columns size change.



---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to