| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | James Coleman <jtc331(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com |
| Subject: | Re: PROC_IN_ANALYZE stillborn 13 years ago |
| Date: | 2020-08-07 21:35:44 |
| Message-ID: | 20200807213544.GA3434@alvherre.pgsql |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2020-Aug-05, Andres Freund wrote:
> I'm mildly against that, because I'd really like to start making use of
> the flag. Not so much for cancellations, but to avoid the drastic impact
> analyze has on bloat. In OLTP workloads with big tables, and without
> disabled cost limiting for analyze (or slow IO), the snapshot that
> analyze holds is often by far the transaction with the oldest xmin.
I pushed despite the objection because it seemed that downstream
discussion was largely favorable to the change, and there's a different
proposal to solve the bloat problem for analyze; and also:
> Only mildly against because it'd not be hard to reintroduce once we need
> it.
Thanks for the discussion!
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2020-08-07 21:37:27 | Re: PROC_IN_ANALYZE stillborn 13 years ago |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2020-08-07 21:20:22 | Re: Issue with cancel_before_shmem_exit while searching to remove a particular registered exit callbacks |