Re: [PATCH] Unremovable tuple monitoring

On 17/11/2011, at 1:47 AM, Robert Haas wrote:

> On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 9:34 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>>> Not sure about the log line, but allowing pgstattuple to distinguish
>>> between recently-dead and quite-thoroughly-dead seems useful.
>>
>> The dividing line is enormously unstable though. pgstattuple's idea of
>> RecentGlobalXmin could even be significantly different from that of a
>> concurrently running VACUUM. I can see the point of having VACUUM log
>> what it did, but opinions from the peanut gallery aren't worth much.
>
> Hmm, you have a point.
>
> But as Yeb points out, it seems like we should at least try to be more
> consistent about the terminology.

Thanks for the discussion so far all. Would it be worthwhile to make another patch that addresses the points from Yeb's reviews? It's not sounding like this unremovable tuple count is something that postgres wants, but I'm happy to keep the patch up to scratch if we're still not sure.

Cheers,

--Royce