Re: [HACKERS] Re: [QUESTIONS] MySQL benchmark page

>
> On Tue, 3 Feb 1998, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > > > This is correct. Vacuum is fast, vacuum analyze is pretty slow. We
> > > > could separate them, I guess, and that would eliminate the write-lock
> > > > and be only a readlock.
> > >
> > > Possible to slip it in for v6.3? Would make it so that an analyze
> > > could be done nightly, to keep statistics up, and then a vacuum once a
> > > week or so just for garbage collection...?
> >
> > When I added analyze, I did not understand the issues, so I was able to
> > work from Vadim's code in vacuum. I put it on the TODO list. Don't
> > know if it can make 6.3. I am working on cleaning up the cacheoffset
> > code right now.
>
> Okay...personally, I'm finding 'vacuum <table>' an acceptable work
> around, so it isn't too big of a priority :)
>

Vacuum probably write-locks the pg_class table because it updates the
table statistics. By vacuuming one table at a time, your lock is
removed and re-asserted, allowing other people to get into pg_class, and
a scan of pg_class is not necessary becuase you supply the table names.

--
Bruce Momjian
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us