From: | David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Michael Paesold <mpaesold(at)gmx(dot)at>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-committers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Re: pgsql: Extract catalog info for error reporting before an error actually |
Date: | 2007-10-25 21:04:58 |
Message-ID: | 20071025210458.GA17890@fetter.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
On Thu, Oct 25, 2007 at 03:54:28PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Simon Riggs wrote:
> >On Thu, 2007-10-25 at 13:51 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> >>Michael Paesold wrote:
> >>
> >>>In the previous discussion, Simon and me agreed that schema
> >>>changes should not happen on a regular basis on production
> >>>systems.
> >>>
> >>>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.
> >
> >We didn't agree that DDL was uncommon, we agreed that running DDL
> >was more important than running an auto VACUUM. DDL runs very
> >quickly, unless blocked, though holds up everybody else. So you
> >must run it at pre-planned windows. VACUUMs can run at any time, so
> >a autoVACUUM shouldn't be allowed to prevent DDL from running. The
> >queuing DDL makes other requests queue behind it, even ones that
> >would normally have been able to execute at same time as the
> >VACUUM.
> >
> >Anyway, we covered all this before. I started off saying we
> >shouldn't do this and Heikki and Michael came up with convincing
> >arguments, for me, so now I think we should allow autovacuums to be
> >cancelled.
>
> Perhaps I misunderstood, or have been mistunderstood :-) - I am
> actually agreeing that autovac should not block DDL.
+1 here for having autovacuum not block DDL :)
Cheers,
David (for what it's worth)
--
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david(dot)fetter(at)gmail(dot)com
Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-10-25 21:35:46 | Re: Autovacuum cancellation |
Previous Message | Stefan Kaltenbrunner | 2007-10-25 20:28:54 | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Extract catalog info for error reporting before an error actually |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Henry B. Hotz | 2007-10-25 21:08:22 | Re: 8.3 GSS Issues |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2007-10-25 20:54:01 | Re: [HACKERS] 8.3beta1 testing on Solaris |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-10-25 21:35:46 | Re: Autovacuum cancellation |
Previous Message | Chris Browne | 2007-10-25 20:31:40 | Minor change to pg_dump docs |