Re: Alternative for vacuuming queue-like tables

From: Csaba Nagy <nagy(at)ecircle-ag(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: kmh496 <kmh496(at)kornet(dot)net>, Postgres general mailing list <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Alternative for vacuuming queue-like tables
Date: 2006-04-28 15:33:58
Message-ID: 1146238438.14093.96.camel@coppola.muc.ecircle.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

> > actually does work, I can confirm that. Is it violating MVCC maybe ?
>
> Yes :-(. I think you can get away with it if all your transactions that
[snip]

Well, I actually don't want to get away this time :-)

This table is only processed by the queue manager and that uses very
short transactions, basically only atomic insert/update/delete. No long
running transaction will ever touch that table.

So this fits perfectly my queue cleanup needs.

Cheers,
Csaba.

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2006-04-28 15:45:14 Re: Postmaster process on port 10000
Previous Message Tom Lane 2006-04-28 15:28:41 Re: Alternative for vacuuming queue-like tables