0

In the /var/lib/pgsql/data/base Postgres that in version 8.4 and it was identified that the error single bank is with 37G which is absurd, is not already realized vacuum full declined nothing and also I put the autovacuum as off in postgresql.conf. the only thing I can do is back up and after that uninstall and reinstall the bank to resolve palliative-mind.

Can someone help me?

I am using Centos 6.7 and I know the Bank that's full ...

Improve this question
2
  • 1
    I have replaced your question text with the translated text you provided in answers (now deleted) and done my best to translate the title. It's still pretty hard to understand in English. You could try asking your question on Stack Overflow em Português. If you decide to do that, please delete this question.
    – Paul White ♦
    Commented Jun 16, 2016 at 5:41
  • If vacuum full does not release the space, then one (or several) of your tables are simply that big. The only way to reclaim that space is to delete data. See the Postgres wiki for some scripts that will help you find the table (or index) that is actually using that much space: wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Disk_Usage
    – user1822
    Commented Jun 16, 2016 at 6:36

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
1

Vacuum (even FULL) isn't the most efficient when it comes to reclaiming space from bloated indexes. And in PostgreSQL 8.x it was even more the issue. I do remember reading about tests where dump, drop and restore might be indeed faster and gets better results than vacuum full. And this is what I would suggest if possible.

There is another option you might try first though, quoting PostgreSQL 8.4 documentation:

The FULL option is not recommended for routine use, but might be useful in special cases. An example is when you have deleted or updated most of the rows in a table and would like the table to physically shrink to occupy less disk space and allow faster table scans. VACUUM FULL will usually shrink the table more than a plain VACUUM would. The FULL option does not shrink indexes; a periodic REINDEX is still recommended. In fact, it is often faster to drop all indexes, VACUUM FULL, and recreate the indexes.

Improve this answer

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.