Re: Aggressive freezing in lazy-vacuum
| От | Tom Lane | 
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Aggressive freezing in lazy-vacuum | 
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 14520.1173242097@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст | 
| Ответ на | Re: Aggressive freezing in lazy-vacuum (ITAGAKI Takahiro <itagaki.takahiro@oss.ntt.co.jp>) | 
| Список | pgsql-hackers | 
ITAGAKI Takahiro <itagaki.takahiro@oss.ntt.co.jp> writes:
> Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> I said nothing about expired tuples.  The point of not freezing is to
>> preserve information about the insertion time of live tuples.
> I don't know what good it will do -- for debugging?
Exactly.  As an example, I've been chasing offline a report from Merlin
Moncure about duplicate entries in a unique index; I still don't know
what exactly is going on there, but the availability of knowledge about
which transactions inserted which entries has been really helpful.  If
we had a system designed to freeze tuples as soon as possible, that info
would have been gone forever pretty soon after the problem happened.
I don't say that this behavior can never be acceptable, but you need
much more than a marginal performance improvement to convince me that
it's worth the loss of forensic information.
        regards, tom lane
		
	В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: