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

Re: autovacuum not prioritising for-wraparound tables

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com>
Cc: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>,"pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: autovacuum not prioritising for-wraparound tables
Date: 2013-01-30 18:26:06
Message-ID: 20130130182606.GA31333@awork2.anarazel.de (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 2013-01-30 10:21:07 -0800, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> > It seems to be broken since the initial introduction of
> > freeze_table_age in 6587818542e79012276dcfedb2f97e3522ee5e9b.
> 
> > Trivial patch attached.
> 
> I didn't see a patch attached.

The archive has it, so I for once haven't forgotten sending it:
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20130130145521.GB3355@awork2.anarazel.de 

While its a clear bug and fixing it in HEAD is a sure thing an argument
could be made that its a clear behavioural change in the back
branches. I don't think it holds too much water, but wanted to mention
it.

Andres

-- 
 Andres Freund	                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services


In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Kevin GrittnerDate: 2013-01-30 18:26:37
Subject: Re: autovacuum not prioritising for-wraparound tables
Previous:From: Kevin GrittnerDate: 2013-01-30 18:21:07
Subject: Re: autovacuum not prioritising for-wraparound tables

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