Re: Need Force flag for pg_drop_replication_slot()

From: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Need Force flag for pg_drop_replication_slot()
Date: 2015-05-29 18:39:02
Message-ID: 20150529183901.GE26667@tamriel.snowman.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

* Andres Freund (andres(at)anarazel(dot)de) wrote:
> How is this measurably worse than trying to truncate a log table that
> has grown too large? That's often harder to fight actually, because
> there's dozens of other processes that might be using the relation? In
> one case you don't have wait ordering, but only one locker, in the other
> case you have multiple waiters, and to benefit from wait ordering you
> need multiple sessions.

Because we don't fall over if we can't extend a relation.

We do fall over if we can't write WAL.

Thanks!

Stephen

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Josh Berkus 2015-05-29 18:47:26 Re: RFC: Remove contrib entirely
Previous Message Josh Berkus 2015-05-29 18:35:24 Re: Need Force flag for pg_drop_replication_slot()