Re: vacuum locking
От | Mario Weilguni |
---|---|
Тема | Re: vacuum locking |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 200310230814.56738.mweilguni@sime.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: vacuum locking (Rob Nagler <nagler@bivio.biz>) |
Ответы |
Re: vacuum locking
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
Am Donnerstag, 23. Oktober 2003 01:32 schrieb Rob Nagler: > The concept of vacuuming seems to be problematic. I'm not sure why > the database simply can't garbage collect incrementally. AGC is very > tricky, especially AGC that involves gigabytes of data on disk. > Incremental garbage collection seems to be what other databases do, > and it's been my experience that other databases don't have the type > of unpredictable behavior I'm seeing with Postgres. I'd rather the > database be a little bit slower on average than have to figure out the > best time to inconvenience my users. I think oracle does not do garbage collect, it overwrites the tuples directly and stores the old tuples in undo buffers. Since most transactions are commits, this is a big win.
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: