| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-committers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: pgsql: Exclude VACUUMs from RunningXactData |
| Date: | 2018-06-07 21:22:15 |
| Message-ID: | 20180607212215.mjni4ki6j2hgg5i2@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-committers |
On 2018-06-07 16:24:30 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > Exclude VACUUMs from RunningXactData
> > GetRunningTransactionData() should ignore VACUUM procs because in some
> > cases they are assigned xids.
>
> Uh, what? Lazy vacuum shouldn't acquire an xid. If it does, that
> would suggest it's running code that it's unsafe for
> GetRunningTransactionData to ignore.
Well, we currently do acquire an xid at the end when truncating (see
[1]). But that still doesn't seem to make it the right thing to ignore
these xids. Let's continue the discussion over there?
Greetings,
Andres Freund
[1] http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/20180607211918.h2cdja26ypriw2sm%40alap3.anarazel.de
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2018-06-08 03:37:50 | pgsql: ecpg: Document new compatibility option |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2018-06-07 20:24:30 | Re: pgsql: Exclude VACUUMs from RunningXactData |