Re: Protecting against unexpected zero-pages: proposal

From: "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
To: "Josh Berkus" <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, "PostgreSQL-development" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Protecting against unexpected zero-pages: proposal
Date: 2010-11-09 22:15:45
Message-ID: 4CD973B102000025000374C7@gw.wicourts.gov
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:

> 6. This would require us to be more aggressive about VACUUMing
> old-cold relations/page, e.g. VACUUM FREEZE. This it would make
> one of our worst issues for data warehousing even worse.

I continue to feel that it is insane that when a table is populated
within the same database transaction which created it (e.g., a bulk
load of a table or partition), that we don't write the tuples with
hint bits set for commit and xmin frozen. By the time any but the
creating transaction can see the tuples, *if* any other transaction
is ever able to see the tuples, these will be the correct values;
we really should be able to deal with it within the creating
transaction somehow.

If we ever handle that, would #6 be a moot point, or do you think
it's still a significant issue?

-Kevin

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Dunstan 2010-11-09 22:25:19 Build farm server database migration complete
Previous Message Josh Berkus 2010-11-09 22:03:09 Re: Protecting against unexpected zero-pages: proposal