| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Steve Singer <steve(at)ssinger(dot)info>, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: snapshot too old, configured by time |
| Date: | 2016-04-23 03:04:25 |
| Message-ID: | 20160423030425.GE5939@momjian.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 07:38:04AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> 2. Without this feature, you can kill sessions or transactions to
> control bloat, but this feature is properly thought of as a way to
> avoid bloat *without* killing sessions or transactions. You can let
> the session live, without having it generate bloat, just so long as it
> doesn't try to touch any data that has been recently modified. We
> have no other feature in PostgreSQL that does something like that.
I kind of agreed with Tom about just aborting transactions that held
snapshots for too long, and liked the idea this could be set per
session, but the idea that we abort only if a backend actually touches
the old data is very nice. I can see why the patch author worked hard
to do that.
How does/did Oracle handle this? I assume we can't find a way to set
this per session, right?
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+ Ancient Roman grave inscription +
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2016-04-23 03:33:07 | Re: checkpoint_flush_after documentation inconsistency |
| Previous Message | David Rowley | 2016-04-23 02:11:02 | Re: EXPLAIN VERBOSE with parallel Aggregate |