Re: [HACKERS] gistVacuumUpdate

2012-01-20 Thread Jaime Casanova
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 10:05 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > On 13.01.2012 06:24, YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote: >> >> hi, >> >> gistVacuumUpdate was removed when old-style VACUUM FULL was removed. >> i wonder why. >> it was not practical and REINDEX is preferred? >> >> anyway, the removal seems incompl

Re: [HACKERS] gistVacuumUpdate

2012-01-20 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
On 18.01.2012 23:38, YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote: i'm wondering because what gistVacuumUpdate used to do does not seem to be necessarily tied to the old-style VACUUM FULL. currently, no one will re-union keys after tuple removals, right? Right. I believe gistVacuumUpdate needed an AccessExclusiveLoc

Re: [HACKERS] gistVacuumUpdate

2012-01-18 Thread YAMAMOTO Takashi
hi, > On 13.01.2012 06:24, YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote: >> hi, >> >> gistVacuumUpdate was removed when old-style VACUUM FULL was removed. >> i wonder why. >> it was not practical and REINDEX is preferred? >> >> anyway, the removal seems incomplete and there are some leftovers: >> F_TUPLES_DELETED

Re: [HACKERS] gistVacuumUpdate

2012-01-18 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
On 13.01.2012 06:24, YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote: hi, gistVacuumUpdate was removed when old-style VACUUM FULL was removed. i wonder why. it was not practical and REINDEX is preferred? anyway, the removal seems incomplete and there are some leftovers: F_TUPLES_DELETED F_DELETED

[HACKERS] gistVacuumUpdate

2012-01-12 Thread YAMAMOTO Takashi
hi, gistVacuumUpdate was removed when old-style VACUUM FULL was removed. i wonder why. it was not practical and REINDEX is preferred? anyway, the removal seems incomplete and there are some leftovers: F_TUPLES_DELETED F_DELETED XLOG_GIST_PAGE_DELETE YAMAMOTO Takashi --