From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Hot Standby and VACUUM FULL |
Date: | 2010-01-31 20:40:07 |
Message-ID: | 1264970407.13782.8635.camel@ebony |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, 2010-01-31 at 15:14 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> If the only benefit of getting rid of VACUUM FULL were simplifying
> Hot Standby, I'd agree with you. But there are numerous other benefits.
> The double-commit hack you mention is something we need to get rid of
> for general system stability (because of the risk of PANIC if the vacuum
> fails after the first commit). Getting rid of REINDEX-in-place on
> shared catalog indexes is another thing that's really safety critical.
> Removing V-F related hacks in other places would just be a bonus.
I should've agreed with this in my last post, cos I do. I want very,
very much to get rid of VACUUM FULL just because it's such a sump of
ugly, complex code. But there is a limit to how and when performs what I
now see is a more major surgical operation.
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2010-01-31 20:41:23 | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Augment WAL records for btree delete with GetOldestXmin() to |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-01-31 20:36:23 | Re: Eliminating VACUUM FULL WAS: remove flatfiles.c |