Re: [HACKERS] Re: pgsql: Avoid extra locks in GetSnapshotData if old_snapshot_threshold <
От | Alvaro Herrera |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Re: pgsql: Avoid extra locks in GetSnapshotData if old_snapshot_threshold < |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20160524200140.GA458845@alvherre.pgsql обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Re: pgsql: Avoid extra locks in GetSnapshotData if old_snapshot_threshold < (Kevin Grittner <kgrittn@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-committers |
Kevin Grittner wrote: > On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 12:00 PM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote: > > On 2016-05-24 11:24:44 -0500, Kevin Grittner wrote: > >> On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 8:28 PM, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 7:48 PM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote: > >> > >>>> That comment reminds me of a question I had: Did you consider the effect > >>>> of this patch on analyze? It uses a snapshot, and by memory you've not > >>>> built in a defense against analyze being cancelled. > > The primary defense is not considering a cancellation except in 30 > of the 500 places a page is used. None of those 30 are, as far as > I can see (upon review in response to your question), used in the > analyze process. I think what this means is that vacuum might remove tuples that would otherwise be visible to analyze's snapshot. I suppose that's acceptable. I wondered if it could cause harm to the size of the sample, but after looking at acquire_sample_rows briefly I think it'd be unharmed. -- Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-committers по дате отправления: