| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Gavin Flower <GavinFlower(at)archidevsys(dot)co(dot)nz>, Dilip kumar <dilip(dot)kumar(at)huawei(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Jan Lentfer <Jan(dot)Lentfer(at)web(dot)de>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Sawada Masahiko <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Euler Taveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com(dot)br> |
| Subject: | Re: TODO : Allow parallel cores to be used by vacuumdb [ WIP ] |
| Date: | 2014-10-17 13:00:45 |
| Message-ID: | CA+U5nM+ZGWax2h28BKioUy6UgPDrPTyW=wKwRmjRqwjNG9xHwA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 17 October 2014 12:52, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> It is quite possible, but still I think to accomplish such a function,
> we need to have some mechanism where it can inform auto vacuum
> and then some changes in auto vacuum to receive/read that information
> and reply back. I don't think any such mechanism exists.
That's exactly how the CHECKPOINT command works, in conjunction with
the checkpointer process.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2014-10-17 13:05:22 | Re: TODO : Allow parallel cores to be used by vacuumdb [ WIP ] |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2014-10-17 12:37:54 | Re: Vitesse DB call for testing |