Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: nested transactions

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Manfred Koizar <mkoi-pg(at)aon(dot)at>,PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: nested transactions
Date: 2002-11-29 05:53:26
Message-ID: 200211290553.gAT5rQP20616@candle.pha.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > It only becomes better if we can throw away that file (or contents) when
> > the transaction completes and we have marked all the subtransactions as
> > completed.  We can't compress pg_clog if we store the parent info in
> > there.
> 
> But we already have a recycling mechanism for pg_clog.  AFAICS,
> creating a parallel log file with a separate recycling mechanism is
> a study in wasted effort.

But that recycling requires the vacuum of every database in the system. 
Do people do that frequently enough?

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2002-11-29 05:56:02
Subject: Re: nested transactions
Previous:From: Shridhar DaithankarDate: 2002-11-29 04:26:19
Subject: Re: Auto Vacuum Daemon (again...)

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group