| From: | "Pavan Deolasee" <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Hot Standby (commit fest version - v5) |
| Date: | 2008-11-20 16:13:23 |
| Message-ID: | 2e78013d0811200813w60326c4cpa98f65707149dde3@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 9:03 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
> I don't think you can do that. Couldn't someone else have run
> heap_page_prune between vacuum's first and second visit to the page?
>
>
>
You mean the second visit in the first pass where we again check for
HeapTupleSatisfiesVacuum ? We hold exclusive lock continuously in the first
pass. So its not possible for someone else to call heap_page_prune. If its
the second visit in the second heap scan, then it removes only the dead
tuples recorded in the first pass. So we should be good there too.
Thanks,
Pavan
--
Pavan Deolasee
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2008-11-20 16:14:01 | Re: Hot Standby (commit fest version - v5) |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2008-11-20 15:50:32 | Re: pg_upgrade: How to deal with toast |