From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
Cc: | John Naylor <john(dot)naylor(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: do only critical work during single-user vacuum? |
Date: | 2021-12-10 01:56:16 |
Message-ID: | 20211210015616.o242b4xchhpglfcy@alap3.anarazel.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2021-12-09 16:34:53 -0800, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> But even still, why not have some variant of single-user mode just for
> this task?
> Something that's easy to use when the DBA is rudely
> awakened at 4am -- something a little bit like a big red button that
> fixes the exact problem of XID exhaustion, in a reasonably targeted
> way? I don't think that this needs to involve the VACUUM command
> itself.
I think we should move *away* from single user mode, rather than the
opposite. It's a substantial code burden and it's hard to use.
I don't think single user mode is a good fit for this anyway - it's inherently
focussed on connecting to a single database. But wraparound issues often
involve more than one database (often just because of shared catalogs).
Also, requiring a restart will often exascerbate the problem - the cache will
be cold, there's no walwriter, etc, making the vacuum slower. Making vacuum
not consume an xid seems like a lot more promising - and quite doable. Then
there's no need to restart at all.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ashutosh Sharma | 2021-12-10 02:08:49 | Re: [Proposal] Fully WAL logged CREATE DATABASE - No Checkpoints |
Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2021-12-10 01:25:53 | Re: do only critical work during single-user vacuum? |