Re: Temporary tables prevent autovacuum, leading to XID wraparound

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, "Tsunakawa, Takayuki" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, "tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com" <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Temporary tables prevent autovacuum, leading to XID wraparound
Date: 2018-08-19 23:09:52
Message-ID: 20180819230952.GD1785@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 06:53:32PM +0200, Michael Paquier wrote:
> I was thinking about adding "Even if it is not atomic" or such at the
> beginning of the paragraph, but at the end your phrasing sounds better
> to me. So I have hacked up the attached, which also reworks the comment
> in InitTempTableNamespace in the same spirit. Thoughts?

It has been close to one week since I sent this patch. Anything? I
don't like to keep folks unhappy about anything I committed.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Thomas Munro 2018-08-20 00:45:02 Re: [FEATURE PATCH] pg_stat_statements with plans (v02)
Previous Message Thomas Munro 2018-08-19 23:08:25 Re: How to estimate the shared memory size required for parallel scan?