Re: Avoid MVCC using exclusive lock possible?
От | Andrew Sullivan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Avoid MVCC using exclusive lock possible? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20040301135410.GA8345@phlogiston.dyndns.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Avoid MVCC using exclusive lock possible? (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Avoid MVCC using exclusive lock possible?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
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 -- Andrew Sullivan
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: