From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | ITAGAKI Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Subject: | Re: Read Uncommitted |
Date: | 2008-05-27 08:46:23 |
Message-ID: | 1211877983.4489.109.camel@ebony.site |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 2008-05-26 at 20:01 +0900, ITAGAKI Takahiro wrote:
> Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>
> > The use of this is clear though: allowing long running transactions
> > against unchanging data to not interfere with other activities. It will
> > also have importance in a Hot Standby mode.
>
> I have an use of the dirty read -- pg_start_backup().
> In 8.3, pg_start_backup takes long time, that is typically
> { checkpoint_timeout * checkpoint_completion_target }.
>
> If we have some updating transaction during pg_start_backup,
> updated tables cannot be vacuumed well. READ UNCOMMITTED mode
> could help us in such a situation.
>
> BEGIN;
> SET TRANSACTION READ UNCOMMITTED;
> SELECT pg_start_backup(timeofday());
> END;
>
OK, point noted, thanks. Not sure what is possible there yet, but I will
think some more.
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Meskes | 2008-05-27 08:51:02 | Re: keyword list/ecpg |
Previous Message | Hannu Krosing | 2008-05-27 08:23:28 | Re: keyword list/ecpg |