From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Hannes Dorbath <light(at)theendofthetunnel(dot)de> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Index trouble with 8.3b4 |
Date: | 2008-01-14 00:31:08 |
Message-ID: | 11187.1200270668@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
I wrote;
> Hannes Dorbath <light(at)theendofthetunnel(dot)de> writes:
>> I have the bad feeling that I need to correct this into "It happens when
>> autovacuum is active on the table".
> Ah-hah, I realize how to explain that too, now.
Hmm, no, scratch that: neither VACUUM nor ANALYZE use a standard
heapscan, so they won't move the syncscan pointer. Were you performing
some other query that did a partial seqscan of the table?
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Trevor Talbot | 2008-01-14 00:32:59 | Re: How to safely compare transaction id? |
Previous Message | Ken Winter | 2008-01-14 00:25:47 | What pg_restore does to a non-empty target database |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Guillaume Smet | 2008-01-14 00:42:07 | Re: Distinguishing autovacuum activity in pg_stat_activity |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2008-01-14 00:31:05 | Re: Distinguishing autovacuum activity in pg_stat_activity |