Re: Question about Idle in TX

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: David Kerr <dmk(at)mr-paradox(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Question about Idle in TX
Date: 2010-08-03 19:57:27
Message-ID: 28051.1280865447@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

David Kerr <dmk(at)mr-paradox(dot)net> writes:
> On Tue, Aug 03, 2010 at 03:49:57PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> - In recent versions of PG, no. Before about 8.3 it was a Really Bad Idea,
> - because the open transaction would prevent VACUUM from reclaiming storage.

> We're on 8.3.9, so hopefully it's fairly safe then?

Should be. You might want to test it just to make sure I'm recalling
correctly when that got fixed. Do a BEGIN in one session, then in
another session insert and delete some rows in a table, then VACUUM
VERBOSE and see if they get cleaned up.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Kerr 2010-08-03 20:02:16 Re: Question about Idle in TX
Previous Message David Kerr 2010-08-03 19:52:57 Re: Question about Idle in TX