Re: preserving forensic information when we freeze
От | Andres Freund |
---|---|
Тема | Re: preserving forensic information when we freeze |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20130528232735.GB818@awork2.anarazel.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: preserving forensic information when we freeze (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: preserving forensic information when we freeze
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2013-05-28 09:39:13 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > On 05/28/2013 06:21 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > > As a general statement, I view this work as something that is likely > > needed no matter which one of the "remove freezing" approaches that > > have been proposed we choose to adopt. It does not fix anything in > > and of itself, but it (hopefully) removes an objection to the entire > > line of inquiry. > > Agreed. I have some ideas on how to reduce the impact of freezing as > well (of course), and the description of your approach certainly seems > to benefit them, especially as it removes the whole "forensic > information" objection. > > One question though: if we're not removing the xmin, how do we know the > maximum xid to which we can prune clog? I can imagine several ways > given your approach. Simply don't count xids which are frozen. Currently we ignore an xid because its a special value, after this because the tuple has a certain hint bit (combination) set. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: