From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Guillaume Smet <guillaume(dot)smet(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Matthew T(dot) O'Connor" <matthew(at)zeut(dot)net>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: First steps with 8.3 and autovacuum launcher |
Date: | 2007-10-05 12:27:54 |
Message-ID: | 1191587274.4223.348.camel@ebony.site |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 2007-10-04 at 17:33 -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Simon Riggs escribió:
>
> > Seems like we don't need to mess with the deadlock checker itself.
> >
> > We can rely on the process at the head of the lock wait queue to sort
> > this out for us. So all we need do is look at the isAutovacuum flag on
> > the process that is holding the lock we're waiting on. If it isn't an
> > autoANALYZE we can carry on with the main deadlock check. We just need a
> > new kind of deadlock state to handle this, then let ProcSleep send
> > SIGINT to the autoANALYZE and then go back to sleep, waiting to be
> > reawoken when the auotANALYZE aborts.
>
> Ok, I think this makes sense.
>
> I can offer the following patch -- it makes it possible to determine
> whether an autovacuum process is doing analyze or not, by comparing the
> PGPROC of the running WorkerInfo list (the list has at most
> max_autovacuum_workers entries, so this is better than trolling
> ProcGlobal).
Looks OK to me, thanks for noticing I glossed over the bit about how to
tell whether it was an auto-ANALYZE.
--
Simon Riggs
2ndQuadrant http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-10-05 14:52:50 | Re: Polymorphic arguments and composite types |
Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2007-10-05 12:25:01 | Polymorphic arguments and composite types |