Re: Lock-free compaction. Why not?
От | David Rowley |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Lock-free compaction. Why not? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAApHDvrO6H+dCO1CyEHaDC3TerWrkHs-dd7g8af5VDHALyUZVQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Lock-free compaction. Why not? (Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Lock-free compaction. Why not?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 10 Jul 2024 at 22:58, Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > IIRC long time ago VACUUM FULL actually worked in a similar way, i.e. by > moving rows around. I'm not sure if it did the lock-free thing as > proposed here (probably not), but I guess at least some of the reasons > why it was replaced by CLUSTER would still apply to this new thing. Yeah, that changed in 9.0. The old version still obtained an AEL on the table. I think the primary issue with the old way was index bloat wasn't fixed. The release notes for 9.0 do claim the CLUSTER method "is substantially faster in most cases", however, I imagine there are plenty of cases where it wouldn't be. e.g, it's hard to imagine rewriting the entire 1TB table and indexes is cheaper than moving 1 row out of place row. David
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: