Re: Recalculating OldestXmin in a long-running vacuum

From: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, 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: 2007-03-13 12:38:31
Message-ID: 45F69B47.8060406@enterprisedb.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches

Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> I am, but I doubt that's it. The response times are dominated by I/O, so
> any increase in lock contention would hardly show up. And the patch is
> only adding one GetOldestXmin call every 1000 scanned pages, which is

Sorry, should be "every 100 scanned pages". The argument still holds,
though.

--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Dunstan 2007-03-13 13:29:14 Re: guc patch: Make variables fall back to default values
Previous Message Heikki Linnakangas 2007-03-13 12:36:58 Re: Recalculating OldestXmin in a long-running vacuum