| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Index trouble with 8.3b4 |
| Date: | 2008-01-09 03:18:22 |
| Message-ID: | 20080109031822.GE20913@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
Gregory Stark wrote:
> I am hoping our other things which ignore VACUUM such as the globalxmin
> calculation are careful not to ignore VACUUM ANALYZE processes?
It doesn't matter -- the ANALYZE is done in a separate transaction (so
the VACUUM part is ignored, the ANALYZE part is not).
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Treat | 2008-01-09 03:57:21 | Re: Experiences with extensibility |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2008-01-09 02:33:03 | Re: Index trouble with 8.3b4 |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2008-01-09 05:22:04 | Some notes about the index-functions security vulnerability |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2008-01-09 02:33:03 | Re: Index trouble with 8.3b4 |