| From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Manfred Koizar <mkoi-pg(at)aon(dot)at>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: nested transactions |
| Date: | 2002-11-29 05:53:26 |
| Message-ID: | 200211290553.gAT5rQP20616@candle.pha.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > It only becomes better if we can throw away that file (or contents) when
> > the transaction completes and we have marked all the subtransactions as
> > completed. We can't compress pg_clog if we store the parent info in
> > there.
>
> But we already have a recycling mechanism for pg_clog. AFAICS,
> creating a parallel log file with a separate recycling mechanism is
> a study in wasted effort.
But that recycling requires the vacuum of every database in the system.
Do people do that frequently enough?
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-11-29 05:56:02 | Re: nested transactions |
| Previous Message | Shridhar Daithankar | 2002-11-29 04:26:19 | Re: Auto Vacuum Daemon (again...) |