| From: | The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Herouth Maoz <herouth(at)oumail(dot)openu(dot)ac(dot)il> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [QUESTIONS] MySQL benchmark page |
| Date: | 1998-02-03 12:10:16 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.NEB.3.95.980203070759.14960J-100000@hub.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Nobody likes to take the time to move discussions, do they? And ya, I'm
about as guilty *sigh*
Move to pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org(dot)(dot)(dot)
On Tue, 3 Feb 1998, Herouth Maoz wrote:
> At 15:01 +0200 on 2/2/98, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
>
> I think the garbage collection should be separated from the statistics.
> Garbage collection needs a write lock, statistics only a read lock. If they
> are not done at the same time, the various tables would be locked for
> shorter periods.
Hrmmmm...good point, I think. Bruce? Vadim? When vacuum'ng a
large table, how much time is spend 'garbage collecting' vs 'statistics'?
I thought that 'vacuum analyze' *was* the statistics aspect of it? Where
just 'vacuum' was only garbage collection...?
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | The Hermit Hacker | 1998-02-03 12:26:42 | Re: [HACKERS] (: JDBC+(Sun ~3:pm MST) CVS :) -also question about regression tests |
| Previous Message | Oliver Elphick | 1998-02-03 12:02:08 | Re: [HACKERS] (: JDBC+(Sun ~3:pm MST) CVS :) -also question about regression tests |