Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Extract catalog info for error reporting before an error actually

Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> > Michael Paesold wrote:
> >> Shouldn't we rather support the regular usage pattern instead of the
> >> uncommon one? Users doing a lot of schema changes are the ones who
> >> should have to work around issues, not those using a DBMS sanely. No?
>
> > Unfortunately, doing lots of schema changes is a very common phenomenon.
> > It makes me uncomfortable too, but saying that those who do it have to
> > work around issues isn't acceptable IMNSHO - it's far too widely done.
>
> Well, there's going to be pain *somewhere* here, and we already know
> that users will find the current 8.3 behavior unacceptable. I'd rather
> have autovacuum not make progress than have users turn it off because it
> gets in their way too much. Which I think is exactly what will happen
> if we ship it with the current behavior.

Agreed. If auto-vacuum is blocking activity, it isn't very 'auto' to
me. If vacuum is blocking something, by definition it is a bad time for
it to be vacuuming and it should abort and try again later.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://postgres.enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +