From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
Cc: | Peter Schuller <peter(dot)schuller(at)infidyne(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: VACUUM ANALYZE blocking both reads and writes to a table |
Date: | 2008-06-30 19:00:40 |
Message-ID: | 3064.1214852440@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> Peter Schuller wrote:
>> Even with the fix the lock is held. Is the operation expected to be
>> "fast" (for some definition of "fast") and in-memory, or is this
>> something that causes significant disk I/O and/or scales badly with
>> table size or similar?
> It is fast.
Well, it's *normally* fast. In a situation where there are a whole lot
of empty pages at the end of the table, it could be slow. That's
probably not very likely on a heavily used table. One should also note
that
(1) The only way vacuum will be able to obtain an exclusive lock in the
first place is if there are *no* other transactions using the table at
the time.
(2) If it's autovacuum we're talking about, it will get kicked off the
table if anyone else comes along and wants a conflicting lock.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2008-06-30 19:04:19 | Re: VACUUM ANALYZE blocking both reads and writes to a table |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2008-06-30 18:58:48 | Re: VACUUM ANALYZE blocking both reads and writes to a table |