Re: Testing autovacuum wraparound (including failsafe)

From: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Testing autovacuum wraparound (including failsafe)
Date: 2021-05-14 01:03:47
Message-ID: CAH2-WznB82TWSy7_5tH0ByvY=w+CLDqK+DPGTE3i9jqBYEPuvw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 7:56 PM Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> wrote:
> I'm convinced -- decoupling the logic from the one-pass-not-two pass
> case seems likely to be simpler and more useful. For both the one pass
> and two pass/has indexes case.

Attached draft patch does it that way.

--
Peter Geoghegan

Attachment Content-Type Size
v1-0001-Consider-triggering-failsafe-during-first-scan.patch application/octet-stream 4.0 KB

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message tsunakawa.takay@fujitsu.com 2021-05-14 01:05:02 RE: Support for VACUUMing Foreign Tables
Previous Message Tom Lane 2021-05-14 01:01:18 Re: OOM in spgist insert