| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Reviewing freeze map code |
| Date: | 2016-06-06 13:53:08 |
| Message-ID: | 5402.1465221188@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 1:46 PM, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> So other idea is to have GUC parameter, vacuum_even_frozen_page for example.
>> If this parameter is set true (false by default), we do vacuum whole
>> table forcibly and re-generate visibility map.
>> The advantage of this idea is that we don't necessary to expand VACUUM
>> syntax and relatively easily can remove this parameter if it's not
>> necessary anymore.
> Attached is a sample patch that controls full page vacuum by new GUC parameter.
I find this approach fairly ugly ... it's randomly inconsistent with other
VACUUM parameters for no very defensible reason. Taking out GUCs is not
easier than taking out statement parameters; you risk breaking
applications either way.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Merlin Moncure | 2016-06-06 13:59:46 | Re: Relax requirement for INTO with SELECT in pl/pgsql |
| Previous Message | David G. Johnston | 2016-06-06 12:27:25 | Re: [HACKERS] OUT parameter and RETURN table/setof |