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

Re: Autovacuum cancellation

From: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Autovacuum cancellation
Date: 2007-10-26 09:32:09
Message-ID: 4721B419.1070700@enterprisedb.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-committerspgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> /*
>  * Look for a blocking autovacuum. There will only ever
>  * be one, since the autovacuum workers are careful
>  * not to operate concurrently on the same table. 
>  */

I think that's a bit unaccurate. You could have multiple autovacuum
workers operating on different tables participating in a deadlock. The
reason that can't happen is that autovacuum never holds a lock while
waiting for another.

-- 
  Heikki Linnakangas
  EnterpriseDB   http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Martijn van OosterhoutDate: 2007-10-26 09:48:23
Subject: Re: module archive
Previous:From: Peter EisentrautDate: 2007-10-26 08:57:01
Subject: Re: module archive

pgsql-committers by date

Next:From: Gregory StarkDate: 2007-10-26 09:49:21
Subject: Re: Autovacuum cancellation
Previous:From: User MkzDate: 2007-10-26 09:12:33
Subject: pgbouncer - pgbouncer: fix signedness warnings in code

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Gokulakannan SomasundaramDate: 2007-10-26 09:48:50
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Including Snapshot Info with Indexes
Previous:From: Zdenek KotalaDate: 2007-10-26 09:17:04
Subject: Fix ecpg dependency on postgres.h

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