| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Emit fewer vacuum records by reaping removable tuples during pruning |
| Date: | 2023-12-24 02:14:05 |
| Message-ID: | ZYeT7YDwvgEkI6uS@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Nov 13, 2023 at 07:06:15PM -0500, Melanie Plageman wrote:
> As best I can tell, our best case scenario is Thomas' streaming read API
> goes in, we add vacuum as a user, and we can likely remove the skip
> range logic.
This does not prevent the work you've been doing in 0001 and 0002
posted upthread, right? Some progress is always better than no
progress, and I can see the appeal behind doing 0001 actually to keep
the updates of the block numbers closer to where we determine if
relation truncation is safe of not rather than use an intermediate
state in LVPagePruneState.
0002 is much, much, much trickier..
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2023-12-24 02:30:21 | Re: pgsql: Prevent tuples to be marked as dead in subtransactions on standb |
| Previous Message | Morris de Oryx | 2023-12-24 02:11:07 | Re: Are operations on real values IMMUTABLE or STABLE? |