| From: | Andreas Pflug <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Qingqing Zhou <zhouqq(at)cs(dot)toronto(dot)edu> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Autovacuum in the backend |
| Date: | 2005-06-17 08:26:46 |
| Message-ID: | 42B28946.8080002@pse-consulting.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
Qingqing Zhou wrote:
> "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>
>>Yeah --- a libpq-based solution is not what I think of as integrated at
>>all, because it cannot do anything that couldn't be done by the existing
>>external autovacuum process. About all you can buy there is having the
>>postmaster spawn the autovacuum process, which is slightly more
>>convenient to use but doesn't buy any real new functionality.
>>
>
>
> One reason of not using lib-pq is that this one has to wait for the
> completion of each vacuum (we don't has async execution in libpq right?),
There *is* async execution in libpq, and it works.
Regards,
Andreas
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Russell Smith | 2005-06-17 08:56:17 | Re: Autovacuum in the backend |
| Previous Message | stig erikson | 2005-06-17 08:16:10 | encoding problems and float |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andreas Pflug | 2005-06-17 08:43:52 | Re: Utility database (Was: RE: Autovacuum in the backend) |
| Previous Message | William ZHANG | 2005-06-17 08:25:29 | Re: Utility database (Was: RE: Autovacuum in the backend) |