| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl> |
| Cc: | Manfred Koizar <mkoi-pg(at)aon(dot)at>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: More vacuum.c refactoring |
| Date: | 2004-06-11 05:28:35 |
| Message-ID: | 19783.1086931715@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl> writes:
> Maybe we could establish heavier testing for this kind of change so
> potential patches can be tested extensively. Concurrent vacuums with
> all kinds of imaginable operations (insert, updates, deletes), in tight
> loops, could be a start.
VACUUM FULL takes an exclusive lock, so it should not have to worry
about concurrent operations on the table. What we have to think about
is the initial states it can see.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Glaesemann | 2004-06-11 06:16:04 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql-server: Clean up generation of default |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-06-11 05:25:15 | Re: More vacuum.c refactoring |