| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: (auto)vacuum truncate exclusive lock |
| Date: | 2013-04-12 17:21:28 |
| Message-ID: | 20824.1365787288@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On 2013-04-12 13:09:02 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> However, we're still thinking too small. I've been wondering whether we
>> couldn't entirely remove the dirty, awful kluges that were installed in
>> the lock manager to kill autovacuum when somebody blocked behind it.
>> This mechanism should ensure that AV never takes an exclusive lock
>> for long enough to be a serious problem, so do we need that anymore?
> Wouldn't that make DROP TABLE stop working while autovac is processing
> the table?
Meh ... I guess you're right. I wasn't thinking about exclusive locks
being taken elsewhere.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2013-04-12 17:32:01 | Re: Enabling Checksums |
| Previous Message | Kevin Grittner | 2013-04-12 17:20:05 | Re: (auto)vacuum truncate exclusive lock |