Re: Feedback on getting rid of VACUUM FULL

From: Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
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: 2009-09-17 22:10:49
Message-ID: m2hbv143yu.fsf@hi-media.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> Completely. This is a user-visible behavior that we have encouraged
> people to rely on, and for which there is no easy substitute.

Excited to have self-healing tables (against bloat), I parse this as an
opening. Previously on this thread you say:

> (Actually, the ctid is only being used for fast access here; the xmin
> is what is really needed to detect that someone else updated the row.
> But the proposed tuple-mover would break the xmin check too.)

So to have the impossible feature, we need a way not to break existing
code relying on ctid and xmin. How stretching would you consider the
idea of taking a (maybe new) table lock as soon as a SELECT output
contains system columns, this lock preventing the magic utility to
operate?

Regards,
--
dim

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2009-09-17 22:13:33 Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: CVS NULL Documentation Clearify documentation of CVS's output of
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2009-09-17 21:50:07 Re: Fwd: Copy out wording