| From: | Vivek Khera <khera(at)kcilink(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Buglist |
| Date: | 2003-08-20 16:47:45 |
| Message-ID: | 16195.42545.204240.993936@yertle.int.kciLink.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
>>>>> "AH" == Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl> writes:
>> once within a vacuum process. I am fairly certian it would reduce
>> disk bandwidth requirements since at least one necessary page will
>> already be in memory.
AH> There's no way to check for "external references", because said
AH> references are actually the running transactions. So you can't drop a
AH> row until all the transactions that were active during your transaction
How does the backend running vacuum detect that a row has no active
references? Why can't the current backend know that same information?
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | rovero | 2003-08-20 17:13:38 | Re: 7.4b1 vs 7.3.4 performance |
| Previous Message | Vivek Khera | 2003-08-20 16:40:03 | Re: Buglist |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Rod Taylor | 2003-08-20 17:09:46 | Re: "SELECT IN" Still Broken in 7.4b |
| Previous Message | Mike Winter | 2003-08-20 16:45:37 | Re: "SELECT IN" Still Broken in 7.4b |