Re: Autovacuum improvements

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Autovacuum improvements
Date: 2007-01-15 18:23:39
Message-ID: 18383.1168885419@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> Note that currently there's no way for a backend to know whether another
> backend is autovacuum or not. I thought about adding a flag to PGPROC,
> but eventually considered it ugly,

No, that was exactly the way I thought we'd do it. One thing to note is
that to avoid race conditions, the PGPROC entry has to be marked as
autovac from the instant it's inserted into the array --- with a
separate area I think you'd have difficulty avoiding the race condition.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Magnus Hagander 2007-01-15 18:31:44 Re: [HACKERS] Checkpoint request failed on version 8.2.1.
Previous Message Tom Lane 2007-01-15 18:21:21 Re: [HACKERS] Checkpoint request failed on version 8.2.1.

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2007-01-15 18:29:03 Re: TODO improvements
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2007-01-15 18:12:39 Re: Autovacuum improvements