Re: Recalculating OldestXmin in a long-running vacuum

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org, Gregory Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, ITAGAKI Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
Subject: Re: Recalculating OldestXmin in a long-running vacuum
Date: 2007-03-27 17:19:25
Message-ID: 28912.1175015965@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches

Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> Maybe we should keep this issue open until we resolve the vacuum WAL
> flush issue? I can then rerun the same tests to see if this patch is a
> win after that.

Sounds like a plan, if you are willing to do that.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Heikki Linnakangas 2007-03-27 17:26:38 Re: Recalculating OldestXmin in a long-running vacuum
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2007-03-27 17:15:43 Re: Recalculating OldestXmin in a long-running vacuum