Re: Feedback on getting rid of VACUUM FULL

From: "Albe Laurenz" <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at>
To: "Tom Lane *EXTERN*" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Dimitri Fontaine" <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com>
Cc: "Hannu Krosing" <hannu(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>, "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>, "Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "Josh Berkus" <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Feedback on getting rid of VACUUM FULL
Date: 2009-09-18 06:50:35
Message-ID: D960CB61B694CF459DCFB4B0128514C203937F1F@exadv11.host.magwien.gv.at
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
> > I don't see any reason why not breaking the user visible behavior of
> > tuples CTID between any two major releases,
>
> > Am I completely wet here?
>
> Completely. This is a user-visible behavior that we have encouraged
> people to rely on, and for which there is no easy substitute.

I second that: it would hurt to lose this generic technique for
optimistic locking.

Yours,
Laurenz Albe

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Zdenek Kotala 2009-09-18 06:51:56 Re: [patch] pg_ctl init extension
Previous Message Zdenek Kotala 2009-09-18 06:43:59 Re: [patch] pg_ctl init extension