Re: [HACKERS] tables > 1 gig

> Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > ... nor do I understand why more people aren't
> > complaining about not being able to vacuum tables that are 1.5 gigs that
> > they used to be able to vacuum.
>
> Most likely, not very many people with tables that big have adopted 6.5
> yet ... if I were running a big site, I'd probably wait for 6.5.1 on
> general principles ;-)
>
> I think what we ought to do is finish working out how to make mdtruncate
> safe for concurrent backends, and then do it. That's the right
> long-term answer anyway.

Problem is, no one knows how right now. I liked unlinking every
segment, but was told by Hiroshi that causes a problem with concurrent
access and vacuum because the old backends still think it is there.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026