| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)skype(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: PATCH to allow concurrent VACUUMs to not lock each |
| Date: | 2005-07-03 16:19:49 |
| Message-ID: | 4788.1120407589@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)skype(dot)net> writes:
> Ok, this is a new version of the vacuum patch with the following changes
> following some suggestions in this thread.
The more I look at this, the uglier it looks ... and I still haven't
seen any convincing demonstration that it *works*, ie doesn't have
bad side-effects on the transaction-is-in-progress logic. I'm
particularly concerned about what happens to the RecentXmin horizon
for pg_subtrans and pg_multixact operations.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Marko Kreen | 2005-07-03 16:52:17 | Re: contrib/pgcrypto functions not IMMUTABLE? |
| Previous Message | Hannu Krosing | 2005-07-03 16:14:38 | Re: PATCH to allow concurrent VACUUMs to not lock each |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2005-07-03 18:34:07 | Re: Roles - SET ROLE Updated |
| Previous Message | Hannu Krosing | 2005-07-03 16:14:38 | Re: PATCH to allow concurrent VACUUMs to not lock each |