Re: How is statement level read consistency implemented?
От | Erik Jones |
---|---|
Тема | Re: How is statement level read consistency implemented? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 38398306-730D-490E-AB2C-ED7BBF243EF4@myemma.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: How is statement level read consistency implemented? (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
On Apr 22, 2008, at 8:35 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Roberts, Jon wrote: > >>>> -With autovacuum, does it skip these rows still being referenced >>>> in a transaction or does it wait? >>> >>> It skips them, the idea being that a future vacuum will remove them. >> >> Awesome. In a large data warehouse, the snapshot too old error is >> very >> annoying and I'm glad PostgreSQL is superior to Oracle in this >> regard. >> :) > > Well, the disadvantage of the PostgreSQL way is that it keeps dead > rows > around for longer than they're actually needed, and so it causes some > problems in pathological conditions -- for example when setting up > large > replication sets with Slony, or during a pg_dump, no dead rows can be > removed. Since the Slony thing can take a very long time, dead rows > start to pile up in a way that can really harm performance. In addition or rather, another potential issue, if you have a REALLY long transaction running then you can risk transaction id wraparound. Erik Jones DBA | Emma® erik@myemma.com 800.595.4401 or 615.292.5888 615.292.0777 (fax) Emma helps organizations everywhere communicate & market in style. Visit us online at http://www.myemma.com
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: