Re: Autovacuum integration patch
От | Matthew T. O'Connor |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Autovacuum integration patch |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 42CAB734.1080300@zeut.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Autovacuum integration patch (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Autovacuum integration patch
|
Список | pgsql-patches |
Tom Lane wrote: >"Matthew T. O'Connor" <matthew@zeut.net> writes: > > >>The current implementation of XID wraparound requires that the vacuum >>command be run against the entire database, you can not run it on a per >>table basis and have it work. At least that is my understanding, >> >> > >No, you're wrong. VACUUMing of individual tables is perfectly good >enough as far as XID wrap protection goes, it's just that we chose to >track whether it had been done at the database level. If we tracked it >in, say, a new pg_class column then in principle you could protect >against XID wrap with only table-at-a-time VACUUMs. (I think you'd >still want the pg_database column, but you'd update it to be the minimum >of the per-table values at the completion of any VACUUM.) > >At the time this didn't seem particularly worth the complication since >no one would be likely to try to do that manually --- but with >autovacuum handling the work, it starts to sound more realistic. > Good, I'm glad I'm wrong on this. This will be another nice advantage of autovacuum then and should be fairly easy to do. Any thoughts on this being a change we can get in for 8.1? Matt
В списке pgsql-patches по дате отправления: