From: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Galy Lee <lee(dot)galy(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jim(at)nasby(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Resumable vacuum proposal and design overview |
Date: | 2007-02-28 09:38:57 |
Message-ID: | 45E54DB1.8010100@enterprisedb.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Galy Lee <lee(dot)galy(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
>> If we can stop at any point, we can make maintenance memory large
>> sufficient to contain all of the dead tuples, then we only need to
>> clean index for once. No matter how many times vacuum stops,
>> indexes are cleaned for once.
>
> I beg your pardon? You're the one who's been harping on the
> table-so-large-it-takes-days-to-vacuum scenario. How you figure that
> you can store all the dead TIDs in working memory?
This reminds me of an idea I had while looking at the bitmap index
patch: We could store the dead TIDs more efficiently in a bitmap,
allowing tables to be vacuumed in lesser cycles.
Of course, that's orthogonal to the above discussion.
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2007-02-28 09:51:46 | Re: Dead Space Map version 2 |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2007-02-28 08:49:55 | Re: Resumable vacuum proposal and design overview |