Re: Order of operations in lazy_vacuum_rel

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-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: Order of operations in lazy_vacuum_rel
Date: 2010-02-08 17:38:55
Message-ID: 20100208173855.GN4113@alvh.no-ip.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
> I see that lazy_vacuum_rel() truncates the heap before it does vacuuming
> of the free space map. Once upon a time this wouldn't have mattered,
> but now it means that cancel interrupts are likely to be ignored for
> the duration of FreeSpaceMapVacuum(). Is that really necessary?
> Would it be okay to swap the two steps?

How would it matter? Interrupts are not enabled until the transaction
is committed anyway, which must happen after both things have finished ..

--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David E. Wheeler 2010-02-08 17:45:13 Re: damage control mode
Previous Message Josh Berkus 2010-02-08 17:34:54 Re: damage control mode