Re: Autovacuum fails to keep visibility map up-to-date in mostly-insert-only-tables
От | Andres Freund |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Autovacuum fails to keep visibility map up-to-date in mostly-insert-only-tables |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20141021004647.GL7176@awork2.anarazel.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Autovacuum fails to keep visibility map up-to-date in mostly-insert-only-tables (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Autovacuum fails to keep visibility map up-to-date in mostly-insert-only-tables
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2014-10-20 17:43:26 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > On 10/20/2014 05:39 PM, Jim Nasby wrote: > > Or maybe vacuum isn't the right way to handle some of these scenarios. > > It's become the catch-all for all of this stuff, but maybe that doesn't > > make sense anymore. Certainly when it comes to dealing with inserts > > there's no reason we *have* to do anything other than set hint bits and > > possibly freeze xmin. > > +1 A page read is a page read. What's the point of heaving another process do it? Vacuum doesn't dirty pages if they don't have to be dirtied. Especially stuff like freezing cannot really be dealt with outside of vacuum unless you make already complex stuff more complex for a marginal benefit. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: