From: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [PERFORM] More detail on settings for pgavd? |
Date: | 2003-11-22 00:51:17 |
Message-ID: | 877k1t2pkq.fsf@stark.dyndns.tv |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance |
Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
> > BTW, do we have any provisions to avoid overlapping vacuums? That is, to
> > prevent a second vacuum on a table if an earlier one is still running?
>
> Yes, VACUUM takes a lock that prevents another VACUUM on the same table.
The second vacuum waits for the lock to become available. If the situation got
really bad there could end up being a growing queue of vacuums waiting.
I'm not sure how likely this is as the subsequent vacuums appear to finish
quite quickly though. But then the largest table I have to play with fits
entirely in memory.
--
greg
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2003-11-22 02:24:19 | Re: Anyone working on pg_dump dependency ordering? |
Previous Message | Eric Davies | 2003-11-22 00:27:33 | mechanism used to store images in Postgres |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Nick Barr | 2003-11-22 11:56:35 | pg_autoconfig.pl |
Previous Message | Chester Kustarz | 2003-11-21 23:53:26 | Re: [HACKERS] More detail on settings for pgavd? |