Re: Interesting glitch in autovacuum
От | Alvaro Herrera |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Interesting glitch in autovacuum |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20080910174025.GI4399@alvh.no-ip.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Interesting glitch in autovacuum (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Interesting glitch in autovacuum
Re: Interesting glitch in autovacuum |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote: > Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> writes: > > Tom Lane wrote: > >> Lastly, now that we have the PROC_IN_VACUUM test in GetSnapshotData, > >> is it actually necessary for lazy vacuum to avoid setting a snapshot? > >> It seems like it might be a good idea for it to do so in order to > >> keep its RecentGlobalXmin reasonably current. > > > Hmm, I think I'd rather be inclined to get a snapshot just when it's > > going to finish. > > I'm worried about keeping RecentGlobalXmin up to date during the > vacuums, not only at the end, because it will be used for HOT page > pruning during the vacuums. Oh, I see. I didn't know we were doing HOT pruning during vacuum; does it make sense? -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: