| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: The vacuum-ignore-vacuum patch |
| Date: | 2006-07-12 13:22:45 |
| Message-ID: | 200607121522.45771.peter_e@gmx.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Am Dienstag, 11. Juli 2006 23:01 schrieb Alvaro Herrera:
> One exception is that we can't do that with full vacuums. The reason is
> that full vacuum may want to run user-defined functions to be able to
> index the tuples it moves. This isn't a problem normally, except in the
> case where the function tries to scan some other table: if we ignored
> that transaction, then another lazy vacuum might delete tuples from that
> table that we need to see.
Functions in the index expression must be immutable, so I don't think that is
a real concern.
--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Larry Rosenman | 2006-07-12 14:01:51 | Re: [patch 0/9] annual pgcrypto update |
| Previous Message | Hannu Krosing | 2006-07-12 13:13:05 | Re: Three weeks left until feature freeze |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Larry Rosenman | 2006-07-12 14:01:51 | Re: [patch 0/9] annual pgcrypto update |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2006-07-12 12:52:41 | Re: [PATCHES] kerberos related warning |