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

Re: BUG #5946: Long exclusive lock taken by vacuum (not full)

From: Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-bugs <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: BUG #5946: Long exclusive lock taken by vacuum (not full)
Date: 2011-03-29 00:48:03
Message-ID: 4D912C43.8040404@Yahoo.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs
On 3/28/2011 8:07 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Jan Wieck<JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>  writes:
>>  I somehow fail to see how this complete reversal of who does what and
>>  affecting code in entirely different parts of the system will qualify
>>  for patching back releases.
>
> I don't think any of the proposals make sense for back-patching.  We
> should be considering what's the sanest way to fix this in 9.2.

So our answer to users, who currently run 8.4 and experience 10+ minute 
blackouts caused by autovac, would be "upgrade to 9.2 when it's out".

Is that actually what you meant?


Jan

-- 
Anyone who trades liberty for security deserves neither
liberty nor security. -- Benjamin Franklin

In response to

pgsql-bugs by date

Next:From: Craig RingerDate: 2011-03-29 02:22:12
Subject: Re: BUG #5927: PostgreSQL8.2
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2011-03-29 00:07:18
Subject: Re: BUG #5946: Long exclusive lock taken by vacuum (not full)

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