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

Re: [HACKERS] Autovacuum improvements

From: "Matthew T(dot) O'Connor" <matthew(at)zeut(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Autovacuum improvements
Date: 2007-01-16 02:36:01
Message-ID: 45AC3A11.3050602@zeut.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> New version of the patch attached.
> 
> I'll probably apply this tomorrow morning unless there are objections.
> 
> An important difference from the previous patch is that
> DatabaseHasActiveBackends (now renamed to
> DatabaseCancelAutovacuumActivity) cycles through the whole ProcArray
> instead of stopping at the first occurence of a backend in that
> database.  This is to be able to fulfill its mission of cancelling *any*
> autovacuum activity that may be taking place on the database (not just
> the one that happens to be below the first process in the ProcArray).

Is there any chance of a race condition here?  That is, can the launcher 
process start a new autovacuum process against that database that your 
code will miss since it was started after you began your search?


In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2007-01-16 02:52:53
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Autovacuum improvements
Previous:From: Takayuki TsunakawaDate: 2007-01-16 01:59:11
Subject: Re: O_DIRECT support for Windows

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2007-01-16 02:52:53
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Autovacuum improvements
Previous:From: Takayuki TsunakawaDate: 2007-01-16 01:59:11
Subject: Re: O_DIRECT support for Windows

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