From: | Ed Loehr <eloehr(at)austin(dot)rr(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Andrew Snow <als(at)fl(dot)net(dot)au> |
Cc: | "Pgsql-General(at)Postgresql(dot) Org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: safety of vacuum verbose analyze on active tables |
Date: | 2000-04-17 16:40:49 |
Message-ID: | 38FB3E91.43C53D91@austin.rr.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Andrew Snow wrote:
>
> > > > what is the relative safety of doing a vacuum verbose analyze
> > on a 24Gb
> > > > table while there are selects and updates/inserts happening on it?
> > >
> > > As far as I know, the table is locked completely during a Vacuum. Any
> > > transactions attempting to do inserts/updates will be paused
> > safely. So go
> > > ahead and schedule your vacuums for whenever you need to.
>
> > There have been reports of problems (corruption, etc.) when trying to do
> > this. See the archive for a discussion along these lines a few
> > months ago.
>
> You've got to be joking.
>
> Is the table locking mechanism in Postgresql broken??
I have no idea (but I doubt it). I simply recall this question being asked
a few months back and a couple folks said something like "Hey, we tried
this and had problems." That was with 6.5.* or earlier. Maybe one of
those folks can pipe up again. I couldn't find them in the archive...
Regards,
Ed Loehr
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ross J. Reedstrom | 2000-04-17 17:29:09 | Re: excell to postgres |
Previous Message | Chris Carbaugh | 2000-04-17 16:24:13 | RE: anybody know who the damn list owner is? |