Re: Autovacuum different in 9.2.4?
От | Alvaro Herrera |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Autovacuum different in 9.2.4? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20130805194619.GB27382@eldon.alvh.no-ip.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Autovacuum different in 9.2.4? ("Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Autovacuum different in 9.2.4?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Joshua D. Drake escribió: > On 08/05/2013 12:13 PM, Jeff Janes wrote: > > >There should be no change in usage, unless you were taking some heroic > >methods to overcome the problems and can now discontinue them. > > That is what is confusing me, I could be cracked but messages like these: > > automatic vacuum of table "pg_catalog.pg_attribute": could not > (re)acquire exclusive lock for truncate scan > > Seem to be new? Yeah, those are new. In the old code, trying to truncate the free pages at the end of a table (which requires an ACCESS EXCLUSIVE lock on the table) could lock other processes out of that table. The new code instead tries to handle this gracefully by giving up the lock if some other process is trying to access the table. The result is that a few free pages might be left over after vacuuming the table. Not a big deal, normally, unless you're really short on disk space. There was discussion about autovacuum being tweaked so that it would reattempt to truncate those free pages in a future pass. I don't know if this was done or not. -- Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: