| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)gmail(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: autovacuum not prioritising for-wraparound tables |
| Date: | 2013-01-25 17:52:46 |
| Message-ID: | 15009.1359136366@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> I think if we backpatch this we should only prefer wraparound tables and
> leave the rest unchanged.
That's not a realistic option, at least not with anything that uses this
approach to sorting the tables. You'd have to assume that qsort() is
stable which it probably isn't.
> I don't think the argument that the pg_class order might work better
> than anything holds that much truth - its not like thats something
> really stable.
I find that less than credible as well.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Christopher Browne | 2013-01-25 17:56:46 | Re: autovacuum not prioritising for-wraparound tables |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2013-01-25 17:50:03 | Re: Doc patch, normalize search_path in index |