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

Re: lazy_vacuum_heap()'s removal of HEAPTUPLE_DEAD tuples

From: Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>,Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com>,pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: lazy_vacuum_heap()'s removal of HEAPTUPLE_DEAD tuples
Date: 2013-01-29 03:28:59
Message-ID: 20130129032859.GA24443@tornado.leadboat.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 02:12:33PM +0000, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On 23 January 2013 04:35, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> wrote:
> >> Also, perhaps we should
> >> consider Simon's one-liner fix for backpatching this instead of the
> >> original patch you posted?
> >
> > I have no nontrivial preference between the two approaches.
> 
> Sorry, I didn't see this. I guess you saw I applied my one liner and
> backpatched it.

Yes; thanks.

> I'm expecting to apply Noah's larger patch to HEAD with the suggested
> edits. I'll do that last thing in the CF.

What "suggested edits" do you have in mind?


In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Robert HaasDate: 2013-01-29 03:35:22
Subject: Re: autovacuum not prioritising for-wraparound tables
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2013-01-29 03:23:57
Subject: Re: Hm, table constraints aren't so unique as all that

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