From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)skype(dot)net> |
Subject: | Re: The vacuum-ignore-vacuum patch |
Date: | 2006-07-29 02:16:39 |
Message-ID: | 20060729021639.GA6616@surnet.cl |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> But the patch changes things so that *everyone* excludes the vacuum from
> >> their xmin. Or at least I thought that was the plan.
>
> > We shouldn't do that, because that Xmin is also used to truncate
> > SUBTRANS.
>
> Yeah, but you were going to change that, no? Truncating SUBTRANS will
> need to include the vacuum xact's xmin, but we don't need it for any
> other purpose.
That's correct.
> > but it means
> > lazy vacuum will never be able to use subtransactions.
>
> This patch already depends on the assumption that lazy vacuum will never
> do any transactional updates, so I don't see what it would need
> subtransactions for.
Here is a patch pursuant to there ideas. The main change is that in
GetSnapshotData, a backend is skipped entirely if inVacuum is found to
be true.
I've been trying to update my SSH CVS several times today but I can't
reach the server. Maybe it's the DoS attach that it's been under, I
don't know.
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
ignore-vacuum-8.patch | text/plain | 16.6 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2006-07-29 02:18:33 | Re: [Pgbuildfarm-members] [Fwd: RE: Build farm on Windows] |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-07-29 01:17:06 | Re: DTrace enabled build fails |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2006-07-29 02:21:01 | Re: The vacuum-ignore-vacuum patch |
Previous Message | Jim Nasby | 2006-07-28 22:43:03 | Re: The vacuum-ignore-vacuum patch |