From: | Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Is there a way to make VACUUM run completely outside |
Date: | 2005-02-09 06:29:17 |
Message-ID: | 1107930557.6647.2.camel@fuji.krosing.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Ühel kenal päeval (teisipäev, 8. veebruar 2005, 13:39-0300), kirjutas
Alvaro Herrera:
> On Tue, Feb 08, 2005 at 01:55:47PM +0200, Hannu Krosing wrote:
>
> > So I guess that making it commit and open new transaction at a regular
> > interval (like each minute) during vacuuming single table would not
> > alter its visible behaviour. That would solve my problem of long-running
> > vacuums on large tables polluting unrelated small but heavily updated
> > tables with dead tuples.
>
> Interesting. The problem is that a long running VACUUM on a single
> table will keep in PGPROC a TransactionId that will last very long,
> which will "pollute" every concurrent Snapshot; so smaller tables can't
> be cleaned up because the tuples are visible for the transaction running
> the vacuum -- except that that transaction cannot possibly want to look
> at them.
Exactly. That's what I was trying to describe in my original post.
--
Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dave Page | 2005-02-09 07:06:28 | Re: How can I use large object on PostgreSQL Linux |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-02-09 05:48:34 | Re: "external indices" ... |