From: | Greg Stark <greg(dot)stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Decibel! <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, ITAGAKI Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Is autovacuum too noisy about orphan temp tables? |
Date: | 2008-10-15 22:52:20 |
Message-ID: | D003FAED-15DB-46B3-8C7D-FDBF027094FD@enterprisedb.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Can autovacuum just set a flag on the orphaned temp table's pg_class
record indicating it's been determined to be an orphan? Then other
tools could easily list orphaned tables and offer to delete them.
greg
On 15 Oct 2008, at 10:52 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> A much better solution would be to not print the warning every time.
>> I think the right solution is to do exactly what you rejected
>> upthread, namely adding some kind of stack to track the last time
>> this
>> was printed.
>
> I really doubt that the problem is worth so much effort. Your
> handwavy
> solution doesn't work, I think, because you are ignoring the problem
> that this code is executed in relatively short-lived processes that
> aren't all examining the same database. By the time you got to a
> solution that did work it'd be pretty complicated.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2008-10-15 22:58:19 | Re: Is autovacuum too noisy about orphan temp tables? |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2008-10-15 22:46:30 | Re: autovacuum and reloptions |