| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Chris Browne <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [DOCS] Autovacuum and XID wraparound |
| Date: | 2007-05-16 21:01:12 |
| Message-ID: | 7460.1179349272@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-docs pgsql-patches |
Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> ... I have resisted having VACUUM freeze
>> tuples before they've reached a quite-respectable age, and I object to
>> having CLUSTER do it either.
> How about freezing anything older than vacuum_freeze_min_age, just like
> VACUUM does?
I suppose that'd be OK, but is it likely to be worth the trouble?
>> I could maybe accept a CLUSTER FREEZE option to do this, but that's not
>> what's in the patch.
> I wouldn't like to add more options to CLUSTER, people are already
> confused about the similar VACUUM options.
Agreed, I wasn't thrilled with that idea.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2007-05-16 21:05:32 | Re: [DOCS] Autovacuum and XID wraparound |
| Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2007-05-16 20:35:20 | Re: [DOCS] Autovacuum and XID wraparound |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2007-05-16 21:05:32 | Re: [DOCS] Autovacuum and XID wraparound |
| Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2007-05-16 20:35:20 | Re: [DOCS] Autovacuum and XID wraparound |