| From: | Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek(dot)Kotala(at)Sun(dot)COM> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: lazy vacuum blocks analyze |
| Date: | 2009-05-06 19:53:13 |
| Message-ID: | 1241639593.1393.35.camel@localhost |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera píše v st 06. 05. 2009 v 15:11 -0400:
> Zdenek Kotala wrote:
>
> > If there is not another problem I suggest to use two different locks for
> > vacuum and analyze.
>
> By itself that won't work -- see vac_update_relstats.
It says:
* Note another assumption: that two VACUUMs/ANALYZEs on a table can't
* run in parallel, nor can VACUUM/ANALYZE run in parallel with a
* schema alteration such as adding an index, rule, or trigger. Otherwise
* our updates of relhasindex etc might overwrite uncommitted updates.
But what "two VACUUMs/ANALYZEs on a table" exactly means? It is not
clear here if VACUUMxANALYZE parallel run is allowed or not. I also
don't see explanation why it is not allowed? From code I don't see any
problem here.
Zdenek
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2009-05-06 19:55:27 | Re: text_pattern_ops and complex regexps |
| Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2009-05-06 19:29:49 | Re: Patch to fix search_path defencies with pg_bench |