| From: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Wes <wespvp(at)syntegra(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Excessive vacuum times |
| Date: | 2005-12-13 08:16:15 |
| Message-ID: | 20051213081615.GF20728@pervasive.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Mon, Dec 12, 2005 at 11:09:01PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Jim C. Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com> writes:
> > On Mon, Dec 12, 2005 at 06:26:37PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> No. Avoiding that would require a new approach to
> >> vacuum-vs-ordinary-indexscan interlocking, so it won't happen until
> >> someone has a Bright Idea (tm).
>
> > Plus there is a TODO to only vacuum pages that are known to have dead
> > tuples, which should hopefully mean no more index-scans during vacuum as
> > well.
>
> No such luck. You delete any tuples, you need to scan the indexes.
Even though you can see what the index values were for the now-dead
tuple?
--
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com
Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Anand Kumria | 2005-12-13 08:16:47 | Re: Bug#342369: PostgreSQL 8.1.0 RHEL / Debian incompatible packages |
| Previous Message | John Sidney-Woollett | 2005-12-13 08:05:05 | Re: Memory Leakage Problem |