| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Freezing is not WAL-logged |
| Date: | 2006-10-19 19:22:04 |
| Message-ID: | 20061019192204.GC16965@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Tom Lane wrote:
> "Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> > I just noticed that freezing a tuple (in vacuumlazy.c) is not
> > WAL-logged.
>
> The theory is that this doesn't matter because the tuple is committed
> either way ... it's equivalent to a hint-bit update which we don't
> WAL-log either.
Also it'd be hugely expensive to log each freeze operation. The
alternative would be to log a VACUUM FREEZE, but that has the potential
to cause enormous recovery runtime.
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2006-10-19 20:29:51 | Re: Freezing is not WAL-logged |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-10-19 19:14:48 | Re: Freezing is not WAL-logged |