| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Fix VACUUM_TRUNCATE_LOCK_WAIT_INTERVAL |
| Date: | 2016-09-07 13:58:16 |
| Message-ID: | 1670.1473256696@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On 7 September 2016 at 13:47, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 11:41 PM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>>> lazy_truncate_heap() was waiting for
>>> VACUUM_TRUNCATE_LOCK_WAIT_INTERVAL, but in microseconds
>>> not milliseconds as originally intended.
>> Don't we need to back-patch this?
> If we do then a database-wide VACUUM on a busy database will take
> substantially longer than it does now.
On the other hand, it's also more likely to successfully perform desired
truncations.
> That may not be perceived as a "fix" by everybody, so we should not do
> it without an explicit agreement by many.
Agreed, but I vote with Fujii-san for back-patching.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2016-09-07 17:36:22 | pgsql: Doc: minor documentation improvements about extensions. |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2016-09-07 12:50:49 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Fix VACUUM_TRUNCATE_LOCK_WAIT_INTERVAL |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Fabien COELHO | 2016-09-07 14:01:25 | Re: pgbench - allow to store select results into variables |
| Previous Message | Victor Wagner | 2016-09-07 13:56:34 | Re: Patch: Implement failover on libpq connect level. |