| From: | ITAGAKI Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Aggressive freezing in lazy-vacuum |
| Date: | 2007-03-07 02:18:20 |
| Message-ID: | 20070307110352.5E09.ITAGAKI.TAKAHIRO@oss.ntt.co.jp |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches pgsql-performance |
Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> I said nothing about expired tuples. The point of not freezing is to
> preserve information about the insertion time of live tuples.
I don't know what good it will do -- for debugging?
Why don't you use CURRENT_TIMESTAMP?
> And your
> test case is unconvincing, because no sane DBA would run with such a
> small value of vacuum_freeze_min_age.
I intended to use the value for an accelerated test.
The penalties of freeze are divided for the long term in normal use,
but we surely suffer from them by bits.
Regards,
---
ITAGAKI Takahiro
NTT Open Source Software Center
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeff Davis | 2007-03-07 02:28:30 | Re: Bug: Buffer cache is not scan resistant |
| Previous Message | Jeff Davis | 2007-03-07 02:10:17 | Re: Bug: Buffer cache is not scan resistant |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Trevor Hardcastle | 2007-03-07 03:06:29 | CREATE TABLE LIKE INCLUDING INDEXES support |
| Previous Message | ITAGAKI Takahiro | 2007-03-07 01:56:04 | Re: Aggressive freezing in lazy-vacuum |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-03-07 04:34:57 | Re: Aggressive freezing in lazy-vacuum |
| Previous Message | Merlin Moncure | 2007-03-07 02:12:03 | Re: compact flash disks? |