Re: Why vacuum?
От | Daniele Orlandi |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Why vacuum? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3A3919BD.3CF14B9F@orlandi.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | AW: Why vacuum? (Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA@wien.spardat.at>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Alfred Perlstein wrote: > > If you're talking about vacuum, you really don't want to do this, No, I'm not talking about vacuum as it is intended now, it's only a process that scans tables to find available blocks/tuples. It is virtually optional, if it doesn't run, the database will behave just like now. > what's going to happen is that since you have an exclusive lock on > the file during your vacuum and no way to do priority lending you > can deadlock. No exclusive lock, it's just a reader. > When your table grows to be very large you'll see what we're talking > about. I see this as an optimization issue. If the scanner isn't smart and loses time scanning areas of the table that have not been emptied, you go back to the current behaviour. Bye!
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: